Undertrials, convicts can't vote from jail: Madras High Court

The Madras High Court on Wednesday dismissed a plea by a detainee seeking to vote in the 2026 Tamil Nadu Assembly elections, citing the statutory bar on prisoners voting.

A Bench of Chief Justice SA Dharmadikari and Justice Arul Murugan dismissed the plea in view of Section 62(5) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, which permits only persons under preventive detention to exercise their right to vote.

Hari Nadar, currently lodged in Puzhal Central Prison, approached the Madras High Court seeking permission to participate in the 2026 Tamil Nadu Assembly elections.

He claimed that he was detained under the Goondas Act and was also a remand prisoner in multiple criminal cases. Nadar contended that he had previously contested elections from the Alangulam Assembly constituency and intended to do so again in 2026.

According to him, prison authorities failed to forward his nomination papers to the Returning Officer in time, leading to rejection of his candidature. He further submitted that despite making representations, he was not permitted to cast his vote either through postal ballot or by making arrangements within the prison.

Nadar argued that since he had not been convicted, denial of voting rights violated his constitutional entitlement. He thus sought directions to enable him to vote.

The Court, however, did not accept this contention.

Referring to the statutory framework, it held that the right to vote is not a fundamental right but a statutory right, and is expressly restricted by law in the case of persons in custody. The exception carved out for preventive detention detainees cannot be expanded to include all prisoners, including those in judicial custody.

The Court had also directed that even eligible detainees must have their willingness independently ascertained by the District Legal Services Authority, after which the prison authorities would forward the details in accordance with election procedures.

It emphasised that such an exercise is confined strictly to preventive detention detainees and not to undertrial or convicted prisoners.

Applying this position, the Court found no merit in Nadar’s plea seeking voting rights or facilitation to contest the election from prison.

The Election Commission was represented by Advocate Niranjan Rajagopalan.