Madras High Court Weekly Round-Up: April 27 - May 03, 2026

Citations: 2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 184 To 2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 196 NOMINAL INDEX MP Venkatesh v. Director General of Income Tax (Investigation) and others, 2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 184 Keshaw Anand v The State of Tamil Nadu, 2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 185 MJ Sankar v Vidhya Jayanth Kulkarni and Another, 2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 186 I Periyasamy v The Deputy Director, 2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 187 K Mani v The Chief Election Commissioner, 2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 188 Arappor Iyakkam v The Director, DVAC, 2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 189 Shayee Nisha v The Registrar General and Others, 2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 190 Balaji v. Mehaboobani, 2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 191 M Sonaimuthu v The Commissioner of Police, 2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 192 Sinora PS Ashok v The Director General of Police and Others, 2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 193 Uma Shankar v State, 2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 194K Punniyamoorthy and another v M/s Escape Artists Motion Pictures and Others, 2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 195 G Rajesh and Another v. The State of Tamil Nadu and Others, 2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 196 REPORT Madras High Court Dismisses Fresh Plea Seeking ECI Probe Into Assets Declared By TVK Chief Vijay Case Title: MP Venkatesh v. Director General of Income Tax (Investigation) and others Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 184 The Madras High Court, on Monday (April 27) dismissed a fresh petition seeking an enquiry by the Election Commission of India, into the assets declared by actor and Chief of Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam (TVK) Party Joseph Vijay for the 2026 TN Assembly Elections. The bench of Chief Justice SA Dharmadhikari and Justice G Arul Murugan dismissed the plea and said that it would pass detailed orders later in the day. Noida Workers Protest: Madras High Court Refuses To Examine Legality Of UP Police's Arrest In Trichy Despite Lack Of Transit Remand Case Title: Keshaw Anand v The State of Tamil Nadu Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 185 The Madras High Court, on Monday (April 27), disposed of a habeas corpus petition challenging the arrest and custody of the prime accused in the Noida Workers Protest case, despite the rejection of a transit remand by the Tiruchirappalli Magistrate Court. The bench of Justice Anand Venkatesh and Justice KK Ramakrishnan noted that the Magistrate, Gautham Buddha Nagar, Uttar Pradesh, who, despite knowing that there was no valid transit remand, had remanded the accused. The court thus held that if it went into the validity of the custody and arrest, it would have to necessarily go into the merits of the order passed by the remand magistrate in Uttar Pradesh. The bench noted that it did not have the territorial jurisdiction to go into the merits, and the same would be against the law laid down by the Supreme Court. 'Wasting Judicial Time': Madras High Court Dismisses Plea Seeking Reward From CBI For Tip-Off On Illegal Luxury Car Imports Case Title: MJ Sankar v Vidhya Jayanth Kulkarni and Another Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 186 The Madras High Court has dismissed a plea filed by a man seeking a cash reward from the Central Bureau of Investigation for giving information regarding an illegal import of luxury cars. Justice AD Jagadish Chandira took note of the CBI's submission that it did not have any scheme for the grant of a reward to informers. Though the petitioner argued that he had received such a reward from the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, the court noted that the petitioner was barking up the wrong tree by claiming such compensation from the CBI. Madras High Court Quashes ED Case Against Minister I Periyasamy After Noting Quashing Of Predicate Offence Case Title: I Periyasamy v The Deputy Director Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 187 The Madras High Court, on Tuesday (28 April), quashed an ECIR registered by the Enforcement Directorate against the Tamil Nadu Minister for Rural Development, I Periyasamy, in connection with an alleged housing plot allotment scam. The bench of Chief Justice SA Dharmadhikari and Justice G Arul Murugan quashed the ECIR after noting that the predicate offence, based on which the ECIR was registered by the ED, was already quashed by the court. The court noted that since the scheduled offence was quashed, there were no proceeds of crime, based on which the ED could pursue its case. Madras High Court Dismisses Plea To Make Candidates Contesting From Multiple Constituencies Liable For Bye-Election Costs On Resignation Case Title: K Mani v The Chief Election Commissioner Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 188 The Madras High Court has dismissed a plea seeking a direction to the Election Commission of India to obtain affidavits from candidates contesting in more than one constituency, assuring that if they resign from any of the constituencies after the election, they would be liable to pay all the election expenses incurred for that particular constituency before resigning. The bench of Chief Justice SA Dharmadhikari and...

Madras High Court Weekly Round-Up: April 27 - May 03, 2026

Upasana Sajeev

Tags