Supreme Court adjourns hearing in case against T.N. CM Stalin’s 2011 poll win

The Supreme Court on Wednesday (February 11, 2026) adjourned the hearing in an enchantment filed by Saidai Duraisamy, who has accused Tamil Nadu Chief Minister M.Okay. Stalin and the ruling DMK get together of indulging in corrupt practices forward of the 2011 Meeting election from the Kolathur constituency, citing a scarcity of readability and construction in the presentation of fabric particulars in his pleadings.

A Bench of Justices J.Okay. Maheshwari and Vijay Bishnoi postponed the hearing in the case of Mr. Duraisamy, who has alleged that the get together used its functionaries and cash to lure voters by modern ways in which quantity to deprave observe below Part 123 of the Illustration of the Folks Act.

Additionally learn | Conflict of titans at Kolathur: Stalin vs Saidai Duraiswamy

The Madras Excessive Court had dismissed the allegations raised by Mr. Duraisamy for lack of conclusive proof in 2017.

Hearing the enchantment, the Bench mentioned it was unable to analyse the findings in the judgment. It mentioned Mr. Duraisamy’s aspect, led by senior advocate Dama Seshadri Naidu, had been requested to arrange transient pleadings, a chart of the paperwork relied on, supplies linked to the findings, amongst others. “Nothing like this has been supplied,” the Bench mentioned. At one level, Justice Maheshwari, visibly upset, mentioned: “This isn’t the one case in India.”

The Court cleared its board of circumstances for 2 days subsequent week to listen to the case. Mr. Stalin and different respondents are being represented by senior advocates Kapil Sibal, Mukul Rohatgi, N.R. Elango Shanmughasunadaram, and Amit Anand Tiwari.

The election regulation required a case alleging corrupt observe below Part 123 of the RP Act to be proved past affordable doubt, as such allegations, if discovered true, would end result in felony proceedings. Mere “preponderance of chances” wouldn’t suffice to make a case of electoral corruption.

The Court, through the hearing, mentioned it can not presumably “presume” consent of a candidate to a corrupt observe below Part 123. The categorical consent needs to be proved by the petitioner. At one level, the Bench, exasperated with the case, mentioned “if in case you have problem in proving it, we’ll throw it out”.

Part 83 of the RP Act mandated that an election petition ought to comprise a concise assertion of the fabric info on which the petitioner relied. The supply required the petition to “set forth full particulars of any corrupt observe that the petitioner alleges, together with as full an announcement as attainable of the names of the events alleged to have dedicated such corrupt observe and the date and place of the fee of every such observe”.

Mr. Duraisamy had mentioned the DMK get together had used the “Thirumangalam Components” to offer cash to the voters in a novel method by group feedings, courier service, forex in newspapers, and slips to buy client gadgets. A items automobile had been caught with packing containers of forex.

The Excessive Court had come to an “irresistible conclusion that there was no categorical averment that the first respondent (Mr. Stalin) had given his consent to his get together functionaries to bribe the voters and self-help group members with a view to draw a misdeed of ‘corrupt observe’”. It mentioned Mr. Stalin couldn’t be held “vicariously liable” for the alleged act of his get together functionaries.

“With regard to the allegation of cash distribution by the first respondent’s get together by adopting the Thirumangalam Components in a novel method of group feedings, courier service, forex in newspapers, Arathi Plate contributions and slips to the voters to buy client gadgets, and many others., this court docket factors out that there isn’t any convincing, passable and acceptable proof produced on the aspect of the petitioner,” the Excessive Court had mentioned.