'You think Vijay wrote down assets?': HC asks if ₹30 crore omission is 'corrupt practice'
The Madras High Court on Wednesday questioned whether the alleged omission of assets worth ₹30 crore from Tamil Nadu chief minister C Joseph Vijay’s election affidavit could amount to a “corrupt practice” when he had declared assets worth around ₹600 crore.
Justice V Lakshminarayanan asked the question while hearing CM Vijay’s application seeking that an election petition challenging his victory from the Perambur Assembly constituency be dismissed.
The judge asked whether an error by a “chartered accountant” who prepared the asset statement could “justify setting aside an election.”
ALSO READ | ‘Afraid of Vijay?’ DMK takes jibe at Rahul, asks him to clarify stand on SIR in Tamil Nadu
“When you become a judge, you are supposed to declare your assets. Do you think I sat and prepared the list? I relied on my chartered accountant. Similarly, do you think Vijay sat and wrote down all his assets? He would have definitely relied on a CA. The CA might have missed some assets. For that, can the election be set aside?” the Court said. “He had declared 600 crore in assets. Can missing out 30 crore worth of assets amount to corrupt practice?” it said.
Did the alleged omissions influence voters?
The Court also questioned whether the alleged omissions could have influenced voters, particularly when Vijay won Perambur by a margin of more than 50,000 votes.
“If I decided to vote for Vijay, it wouldn’t matter to me if he owns what property. Do you think it would make a difference to a voter in Perambur if Vijay had failed to disclose 30 crore worth of assets,” Justice Lakshminarayanan said to the petitioner’s counsel.
ALSO READ | Vijay calls Stalin’s remarks on Sathyabama ‘indecent, perverse’, says TVK will respond
Election petition alleges discrepancies in affidavit
The Court made the observations while hearing an election petition filed by one S Dinesh, a voter from Perambur, challenging Vijay’s victory on the ground that his 2026 election affidavit contained several discrepancies in the disclosure of immovable properties.
Dinesh has sought a declaration that Vijay’s election stands void on account of what he describes as “wilful and deliberate” suppression, misrepresentation and false declarations.
The petitioner has alleged discrepancies concerning several properties. These include 50 cents of land in Vilpatti village, Kodaikanal, which Vijay declared as a property he purchased but which the petitioner claims forms part of government poromboke land. He has also questioned Vijay’s disclosure concerning a Porur property, alleging discrepancies in its extent and purchase price.
Vijay denies allegations, seeks dismissal of petition
Vijay, however, has denied the allegations and urged the High Court to reject the election petition at the threshold.
Senior Advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan, who appeared for Vijay, told the High Court that the petition did not contain the material particulars required to sustain an election challenge and did not explain how the alleged discrepancies affected the election result.
In his reply filed before the Court, Vijay described the allegations as “false, unfounded, baseless and completely misconceived” and said they rested on “conjectures and surmises”.
“The entire election petition runs into pages and pages of microscopic dissection of my Form 26 with an item wise allegation of fluctuations in value of properties declared therein, whether or not these fluctuations are material or not... Even if it is assumed (though not admitted) that the contents of the entire election petition are true and correct, it would not disclose any cause of action,” it reads.
Vijay also argued that the petitioner had not shown how the alleged defects affected the election outcome, saying voters knew they were choosing him as a well-known cinema actor offering a political alternative.
The Court will continue hearing further arguments in the case on October 8.
KioskNews shows a cleaned-up reading view extracted from the publisher’s page — the original always lives on their site, not ours.