Kerala HC asks Returning Officer to decide NDA candidate Anjali Nair’s plea to change ballot name by April 4

The Kerala High Court on Wednesday directed the Returning Officer of the Thrippunithura Assembly Constituency to decide on the representation preferred by actress and Twenty20 party candidate Anjali P.V. to change her name to her more popularly known name “Anjali Nair” in the ballot paper/Electronic Voting Machine (EVM) in the upcoming Legislative Assembly elections by April 4.

A single bench of Justice PV. Kunhikrishnan, while hearing a plea preferred by actress Anjali Nair, orally said that a candidate’s name should be shown as how she is known to the public. It was also orally said that no candidate should miss a vote because a voter has not identified them.

Advertisement

Anjali Nair, a Malayalam actress fielded by the Twenty20 political party, a constituent of the National Democratic Alliance (NDA) in Kerala, has raised concerns that her name is recorded as Anjali PV in the electoral records.

In her plea filed before the High Court, she said that though the name entered in the nomination paper is ‘Anjali P.V.’, she is more popularly known as ‘Anjali Nair’ and she is identified by the latter name in political circles, public life, party communications, media references, and among the voters of the Thripunithura constituency. Therefore, before the preparation of the list of contesting candidates, she had made a written request to the Returning Officer as per the proviso to Rule 8(2) of the Conduct of Elections Rules, 1961, requesting that her name be shown as ‘Anjali Nair’. However, her name in the list published was still shown as ‘Anjali P.V.’

Aggrieved, she made a representation before the Returning Officer seeking immediate correction of her name. As no action was taken, the actress on Monday addressed an urgent representation to the Chief Electoral Officer(CEO), Kerala, seeking urgent intervention. With this representation also not acted upon, she has approached the High Court.

In her plea, she contended that the language of the Proviso to Rule 8(2) is mandatory and not discretionary. She further submitted that the only condition precedent is satisfaction as to the genuineness of the request, which is not in question in the present case. She has annexed her Wikipedia page as evidence to show that her popularly known name is ‘Anjali Nair’.

On Tuesday, when the petition was moved urgently before a coordinate bench, the standing counsel for the Election Commission was granted time to take instructions. When the matter came up for hearing on Wednesday, the counsel representing the Electoral Officer submitted that the actress is presently registered under the name in which she had applied. He further submitted that later on, she decided to change the same and filed a representation. He also pointed out that in the meeting held on March 28, the model ballot paper bearing her original name was shown to her.

However, the Court observed that it is essential for a candidate to be identifiable to voters. It orally remarked that a candidate’s name should be shown as she is known to the public. The Court also observed that no candidate should lose a vote due to a voter’s inability to identify them.

After hearing both parties, the Court directed the concerned returning Returning Officer to consider the representation submitted by Anjali Nair, conduct a hearing on April 4 at 11 am, and pass orders on the same day.

During the hearing, Justice Kunhikrishnan characterised the tactic of fielding candidates with similar names as a fundamental assault on democratic integrity. He argued that such actions are specifically designed to mislead the public and could effectively invalidate the electoral process. By pointing out that parties across the spectrum employ this strategy—using nearly identical names to siphon off votes—he called for an immediate end to the practice to protect the sanctity of the ballot.

“It’s a massacre of democracy. It is only to confuse the voters. It will efface the election. I am against that. All political parties are doing this…If Kunhikrishnan PV. is contesting, they will find Kunhikrishnan T.V., K.V., etc. That should be stopped.”