Kochi: In a sharp oral observation with wider electoral implications, the Kerala High Court on Wednesday cautioned against the growing practice of fielding “namesake” candidates to mislead voters, terming it a “massacre of democracy”.
Hearing a plea by actor-turned-politician Anjali P. V., Justice P. V. Kunhikrishnan remarked that political parties often exploit similar names to create confusion on ballot papers and Electronic Voting Machines (EVMs).
“It is only to confuse the voters. It will efface the election. I am against that… If Kunhikrishnan P.V. is contesting, they will find Kunhikrishnan T.V., K.V., etc. That should be stopped,” the judge observed orally.
The court’s remarks came while directing the Returning Officer of the Trippunithura Assembly constituency to consider and pass orders on the actor’s request to change her name on the ballot from ‘Anjali P.V.’ to her widely recognised name, ‘Anjali Nair’, ahead of the upcoming Assembly elections.
The petitioner, contesting as a candidate of the Twenty20 party, which is now aligned with the National Democratic Alliance (NDA), argued that she is publicly and politically identified as Anjali Nair.
She contended that retaining her official name on the ballot could lead to voter confusion and adversely affect her electoral prospects.
According to her plea, despite submitting a written request under the proviso to Rule 8(2) of the Conduct of Elections Rules, 1961, before the publication of the final list, her name continued to appear as Anjali P.V.
Subsequent representations to the Returning Officer and the Chief Electoral Officer also failed to yield a response, prompting her to approach the High Court.
The court underscored that candidates must be identifiable to voters, observing that no one should lose votes merely due to a failure of recognition.
It directed that the actor be heard on Saturday and that a decision be taken immediately thereafter.
The plea further stated that all campaign materials, including posters and banners, carry the name ‘Anjali Nair’, and any discrepancy on the EVM could “cascade into confusion” on polling day, undermining the very purpose of electoral clarity.
With polling scheduled for April 9, the case has brought renewed focus on ballot transparency and the integrity of voter choice.
(IANS)
