Madras High Court begins hearing CM Vijay's plea to throw out election petitions

The Madras High Court on Monday began hearing applications filed by Tamil Nadu Chief Minister C. Joseph Vijay seeking the outright rejection of four election petitions challenging his victories in the 2026 Legislative Assembly elections. Justice V. Lakshminarayanan, who had earlier warned the Chief Minister and Sports Minister Aadhav Arjuna of costs for repeatedly seeking adjournments, took up the four applications one after another after senior counsel Srinath Sridevan made the request. Three of the petitions challenge Vijay's election from the Perambur constituency; the fourth challenges his victory from Tiruchi East. Two more petitions challenge the Villivakkam victory of Sports Minister Aadhav Arjuna, who is also a respondent in connected litigation. Vijay and Arjuna had informed the court of their intention to seek rejection of the petitions, but their counsel repeatedly sought time to file the applications, citing the ongoing Assembly session. The court, while refraining from imposing costs, made its displeasure clear, observing that election petitions must be decided within six months and that it was "not bothered about personalities". The applications now before the court seek to have the challenges dismissed at the threshold, without a full trial. The legal question is whether the petitions disclose a triable cause of action. For the Chief Minister, the stakes are political as much as legal: a leader who swept to power promising a clean break with old politics is asking the court to shut the door on scrutiny of his own mandate before the evidence is even examined. Separately, the Madras High Court had earlier dismissed pleas seeking an Income Tax investigation into alleged discrepancies in the affidavits filed by Vijay and other leaders during the 2026 elections. In Vijay's case, petitioner V. Vignesh had pointed to a variation of over Rs 100 crore between the movable assets declared in the Perambur filing (Rs 115.13 crore) and the Tiruchi East filing (Rs 220.15 crore). The Income Tax Department's interim report had noted inconsistencies, but the court held that election disputes must travel through election petitions under the Representation of the People Act, not writ petitions seeking parallel probes. That is precisely the forum the Chief Minister now wants closed. If the petitions are rejected, the questions they raised about his election will die unanswered; if they survive, the court will hear them on their merits. What is already on record is the court's impatience: two weeks' time granted, extensions sought, costs threatened. The man who asked the people of Tamil Nadu to trust him now asks the court to trust that there is nothing to see. The hearing continues.