Madras High Court to Hear Allegations of Asset Non-Disclosure Against M.K. Stalin
A writ petition filed by a rival candidate accuses the Tamil Nadu Chief Minister of concealing his role in the DMK Charitable Trust. The Madras High Court will examine claims of election affidavit suppression on July 27, 2026.
Legal Challenge Over Electoral Transparency
The Madras High Court is set to review a writ petition on Monday, July 27, 2026, targeting former Tamil Nadu Chief Minister M.K. Stalin. The petition, filed by 73-year-old advocate T. Sivagnanasambandan, alleges that the DMK president failed to disclose specific beneficial interests and trusteeships in his mandatory election filings. Sivagnanasambandan, who ran against Stalin in the Kolathur constituency during the 2026 Legislative Assembly elections under the Desiya Makkal Sakthi Katchi (DMSK) banner, argues that this omission violates federal election laws.
Allegations of Property and Trust Suppression
At the center of the dispute is the DMK Charitable Trust. The petitioner asserts that Stalin assumed the role of managing trustee following the death of his father, M. Karunanidhi, in 2018. According to the filing, the trust purchased land in Kadambadi village, Chengalpattu district, for ₹2.27 crore in 2019. This transaction was reportedly documented at the Tirukazhukundram Sub Registrar’s office.
The petitioner contends that Stalin purposefully excluded these details from the Form-26 affidavit submitted to the Returning Officer. Under Section 33A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, and Rule 4A of the Conduct of Election Rules, 1961, candidates must reveal:
- All movable and immovable assets
- Liabilities and financial interests
- Trusteeships and beneficial interests
- Material particulars relevant to their financial status
Demand for Election Commission Action
The First Division Bench, comprising Chief Justice Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari and Justice G. Arul Murugan, will hear the plea for a directed inquiry. Sivagnanasambandan claims he originally petitioned the Election Commission of India (ECI) and the Chief Electoral Officer (CEO) on May 12, 2026, but received no response. He is now asking the court to compel these authorities to investigate the alleged suppression and, if proven, initiate criminal proceedings under Section 125A of the 1951 Act. The petitioner maintains that such disclosures are not formalities but are required to ensure voters make an informed choice based on the integrity of the contestants.
Source: The Hindu — News
