Sanchayita Lahkar

The High Court of Madras, Division Bench of Chief Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava and Justice G. Arul Murugan, dismissed a public interest litigation that sought a direction to the Election Commission of India to clarify its position on allegations raised by the Leader of the Opposition concerning large-scale voter list manipulation in the 2024 General Elections to the 18th Lok Sabha. The petition further sought disclosure of electoral roll data in machine-readable format and a status report on inquiries and audits under Articles 324, 14 and 19(1)(a) of the Constitution. The Court found the plea to be misconceived, vague, and lacking supporting material, stating that no such direction to the Commission could be issued.

A public interest litigation was filed before the High Court of Madras seeking directions against the Election Commission of India. The petitioner sought issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the Commission to clarify its position regarding allegations of large-scale voter list manipulation in the 2024 General Elections to the 18th Lok Sabha. These allegations were referred to as having been raised by the Leader of the Opposition in a presentation on 7 August 2025 and further corroborated by a Union Minister in a press conference on 13 August 2025.

Also Read: Supreme Court | Death Penalty in 2014 Child Rape-Murder Case Set Aside | Accused Acquitted as Circumstantial and Forensic Evidence Failed to Prove Guilt Beyond Reasonable Doubt

The petition also requested a consequential order directing the Election Commission to produce and make available in the public domain electoral roll data for all constituencies in machine-readable format. It additionally sought a detailed status report of actions, inquiries, audits and measures undertaken in response to these allegations. The reliefs were invoked with reference to Articles 324, 14 and 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India.

The Court observed: “Having regard to the nature of sweeping directions which are sought, this public interest litigation, if we may say so, is completely misconceived.”

It further recorded: “The petition lacks concrete material and only refers to allegations, counter-allegations made on certain platform. The petition only reproduces those allegations, without there being any independent research. It seeks this court to make roving enquiry. With the present content and form, it is vague, lacks material details and particulars.”

The Court also stated: “No such direction to ‘clarify its position’ to the Commission, as has been sought in this petition, can be granted.”

Also Read: Madras High Court Directs Authorities To Permit PwD Candidate In NEET PG 2025–26 Counselling Based On 2024 Rank Under Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act and PGMER 2023

The Division Bench added: “We have not expressed any opinion on merits and leave it to be considered in appropriately constituted petition. Further, this order shall not come in the way of the Election Commission in taking its own decision on issues sought to be raised in the petition.”

The Court directed: “Writ petition is misconceived and, accordingly, dismissed with costs quantified at Rs.1,00,000/- [Rupees One Lakh only] payable to the Tamil Nadu State Legal Services Authority within one month. Consequently, interim application stands closed.

Advocates Representing the Parties

For the Petitioner: Adv. (C.A). V. Venkata Sivakumar, appearing in person.
For the Respondents: Mr. Niranjan Rajagopalan, Standing Counsel; Mr. K. Seetha Ram,

Case Title: Adv. (C.A.) V. Venkata Sivakumar v. The Election Commission of India & Ors.
Case Number: W.P. No. 34108 of 2025
Bench: Chief Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava and Justice G. Arul Murugan