Court finds no evidence that OCI cardholder cast vote outside his constituency; FIR registered on mere presumption and similarity of names
In a significant judgment delivered on September 24, 2026, the Madras High Court quashed a First Information Report (FIR) registered against Chandirasekar, an Australian citizen and Overseas Citizen of India (OCI) cardholder, who was accused of illegal voting in the Tamil Nadu Assembly elections. The case arose from allegations that Chandirasekar had voted in the 22-Virugambakkam Assembly Constituency in South Chennai, despite being ineligible as an Australian citizen.
The petitioner, Chandirasekar, holds an Australian passport and an OCI card and possessed a valid Voter ID card for the Erode Constituency. The prosecution claimed he voted at Avichi Higher Secondary School, Arcot Road, Saligramam, Chennai, on April 23, 2026. The complaint was based on the presence of indelible ink traces on his finger observed during immigration checks when he was about to depart India in May 2026, as well as the similarity between his name and that of the person who allegedly voted illegally.
Upon hearing the case, the Court noted that the petitioner's possession of a Voter ID for the Erode Constituency made it impossible for him to have cast a vote in the 22-Virugambakkam Assembly Constituency. Further, the FIR was registered solely on presumption and mechanical assumptions by the complainant, without any substantive material evidence confirming the petitioner's alleged illegal act.
The petitioner also provided CCTV footage and evidence showing his presence at his sister's residence in Trichy on the date of the alleged voting, thereby reinforcing his claim of non-involvement. The Court observed that the police had not yet obtained the CCTV footage from the polling station where the illegal voting was alleged.
Highlighting the absence of concrete evidence and noting that the investigation would serve no useful purpose, the Court quashed the FIR registered under Sections 172, 318(2), and 337 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 read with Section 31 of the Representation of the People Act. The Court emphasized that mere similarity in names and traces of indelible ink were insufficient to sustain criminal proceedings.
This judgment provides clarity on the legal position regarding voting rights of OCI cardholders and highlights the necessity for proper material evidence before initiating criminal proceedings for electoral offences. It also underscores the importance of not allowing mechanical or presumptive complaints to burden innocent individuals with legal proceedings.
Bottom Line:
FIR alleging illegal voting by an OCI cardholder/Australian citizen was quashed where there was no material to show that petitioner had cast vote in the concerned constituency, and complaint was lodged on mere presumption based on similarity of names and traces of indelible ink.
Statutory provision(s):
Sections 172, 318(2), 337 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023; Section 31 of the Representation of the People Act
Chandirasekar v. State, (Madras) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2992099
