Madras High Court on Monday issued notices on a petition seeking an investigation into alleged inconsistencies in the assets declared by Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam chief Vijay in affidavits filed for the 2026 Tamil Nadu Assembly elections.
Chennai: The bench comprising Chief Justice SA Dharmadhikari and Justice G Arul Murugan issued notices to Vijay, the Director General of Income Tax (Investigation), the Election Commission of India, and the Returning Officers of Perambur and Trichy East constituencies.
While ordering notice, the court orally observed that there appeared to be an irregularity, stating that assets worth nearly ₹100 crore were allegedly not disclosed in one of the affidavits. The matter has been posted for hearing next week.
“This is an irregularity. More than ₹100 crores has not been disclosed,” the court orally remarked, as per LiveLaw.
The petition was filed by V Vignesh, who alleged major discrepancies between the affidavits submitted by Vijay in the two constituencies.
The petitioner alleged that the disappearance of a high-value asset amounts to suppression of assets, raising serious concerns regarding beneficial ownership, routing of funds, and concealment of material particulars.
It was further contended that such a discrepancy between declarations cannot be attributed to a clerical error or approximation.
According to the plea, Vijay declared assets worth ₹115.13 crore before the Returning Officer in Perambur, while assets worth ₹220.15 crore were disclosed before the Returning Officer in Trichy East.
The petitioner argued that the variation was unexplained and unsupported by documents, and that the only reasonable inference is that either one of the affidavits is false or the corresponding corporate filings are inaccurate, warranting a thorough investigation in either scenario.
The plea seeks a detailed probe into the asset declarations and submission of a report before the Returning Officers of both constituencies, with the findings made public before polling on April 23.
While ordering notice, the court orally observed that there appeared to be an irregularity, stating that assets worth nearly ₹100 crore were allegedly not disclosed in one of the affidavits. The matter has been posted for hearing next week.
“This is an irregularity. More than ₹100 crores has not been disclosed,” the court orally remarked, as per LiveLaw.
The petition was filed by V Vignesh, who alleged major discrepancies between the affidavits submitted by Vijay in the two constituencies.
The petitioner alleged that the disappearance of a high-value asset amounts to suppression of assets, raising serious concerns regarding beneficial ownership, routing of funds, and concealment of material particulars.
It was further contended that such a discrepancy between declarations cannot be attributed to a clerical error or approximation.
According to the plea, Vijay declared assets worth ₹115.13 crore before the Returning Officer in Perambur, while assets worth ₹220.15 crore were disclosed before the Returning Officer in Trichy East.
The petitioner argued that the variation was unexplained and unsupported by documents, and that the only reasonable inference is that either one of the affidavits is false or the corresponding corporate filings are inaccurate, warranting a thorough investigation in either scenario.
The plea seeks a detailed probe into the asset declarations and submission of a report before the Returning Officers of both constituencies, with the findings made public before polling on April 23.