The Madras High Court dismissed petitions seeking scrutiny of alleged discrepancies in election affidavits filed by TVK leader Vijay, Udhayanidhi Stalin, and Tamilisai Soundararajan during Tamil Nadu Assembly elections 2026.
Congress leader Meenakshi Natarajan’s Rajya Sabha nomination from Madhya Pradesh was rejected over alleged non-disclosure in her election affidavit, triggering a legal battle. The Supreme Court declined to intervene, holding that election disputes arising after the poll process begins must be challenged through the statutory election petition route.
The Calcutta High Court is examining the legality of recognising rebel TMC MLA Ritabrata Banerjee as Leader of Opposition in the West Bengal Assembly. Hearing Sobhandeb Chattopadhyay’s challenge, the Court directed that the Speaker’s recognition order be placed on record and scheduled further hearing for June 16.
Today, On 11th June , The Supreme Court on Thursday agreed to hear on Friday a petition filed by Congress leader Meenakshi Natarajan challenging the rejection of her Rajya Sabha nomination from Madhya Pradesh. Natarajan has sought judicial intervention against the decision, bringing the nomination dispute before the apex court for urgent consideration.
Senior Congress leader Meenakshi Natarajan has moved the Supreme Court challenging the rejection of her Rajya Sabha nomination from Madhya Pradesh. The plea raises important questions on candidate disclosure obligations, election transparency, pending court proceedings, and the legality of the Returning Officer’s decision.
The Madras High Court directed the Election Commission of India to furnish election records relating to Tamil Nadu Deputy Chief Minister Udhayanidhi Stalin to an unsuccessful candidate seeking to challenge the Chepauk-Thiruvallikeni election result. The Court held that delaying access to documents cannot defeat a candidate’s statutory right to file an election petition.
The Delhi High Court declined to order a fresh election for the Bar Council of Delhi, rejecting pleas seeking repolling over alleged electoral irregularities. The decision brings temporary closure to a significant legal dispute concerning the conduct, fairness, and administration of the BCD elections.
The Madras High Court stressed that election petitions must be decided within a reasonable time, warning that prolonged delays undermine electoral accountability and democratic principles. Criticising the six-year pendency of the Radhapuram election appeal, the Court described the situation as a “grave mockery of justice.”
A PIL before the Supreme Court seeks constituency-wise disclosure of voter exclusions and electoral roll changes during West Bengal’s Special Intensive Revision, alleging transparency concerns and potential impact on voter participation ahead of the 2026 Assembly elections, despite the Court upholding the Election Commission’s revision powers.