People challenge election defeats in the heat of the moment, later accept results: Madras High Court

The Madras High Court on Monday observed that disappointment following an electoral defeat sometimes prompts people to challenge election results in court, but they may subsequently come to terms with the outcome. [S Vasu Vs Senthamizhselvan]

Justice D Bharatha Chakravarthy made the observation while allowing the withdrawal of an election petition challenging the election of DMK legislator R Senthilselvan from the Sirkazhi Assembly constituency.

"Once you lose an election, you can understand that psychology. Then they file it. At least this person has realised it in the near future. I should encourage him, not discourage him," the judge remarked.

The judge further observed that such reactions were understandable considering human nature.

"We are all human beings at the end of the day," Justice Bharatha Chakravarthy said.

The observations came during the hearing of an application to withdraw an election petition filed by S Vasu.

The Court noted that it had earlier passed a detailed order directing compliance with the procedure prescribed under the Representation of the People Act, 1951, and the relevant rules for withdrawing election petitions.

It recorded that the required publication had been carried out and the statutory period of 15 days had expired.

During this period, nobody had filed an application seeking to continue the election petition. There were also no objections to the withdrawal.

Accordingly, the Court permitted the withdrawal and dismissed the election petition without imposing costs.

The judge also directed the Registry to refund the security deposit made by the petitioner without insisting on a separate application.

The Court further directed that its order be communicated to the Election Commission of India.

Under the Representation of the People Act, election petitions cannot be withdrawn merely at the discretion of the petitioner. The withdrawal requires permission from the High Court, and the prescribed procedure allows eligible persons to seek substitution and continue the proceedings.

The requirement is intended to ensure that election challenges are not privately withdrawn without giving other eligible persons an opportunity to pursue the allegations.