In an unexpected turn during Monday’s hearing at the Kerala High Court, Justice P.V. Kunhikrishnan expressed strong concern after a 24-year-old woman candidate found her name quietly removed from the voters list just four days before the nomination window closes. The tense courtroom atmosphere reflected the political urgency outside, particularly in Thiruvananthapuram’s Muttada division where local polls are only days away.
Background
The petitioner, Vyshna S.L, a Congress candidate contesting from Ward 27 of the Thiruvananthapuram Corporation, had her name included in both the preliminary and final electoral rolls. Everything seemed normal until an objection was filed by a local resident, Dhanesh Kumar, claiming Vyshna was not an “ordinary resident” of the ward.
Vyshna, however, produced a stack of documents showing her address- Voter ID, Aadhaar, driving licence, passport - all pointing to the same locality where she claims she has lived consistently. According to her, even the hearing held by officials was flawed because the complainant who triggered the objection “did not turn up at all.”
Despite this, she received a notice informing her that her name had been deleted from the final voters list. She appealed before the District Collector but feared, as her counsel put it, “political influence might derail the process,” especially with the electoral roll set to freeze soon. With the clock ticking, she approached the High Court seeking urgent intervention.
Court’s Observations
Justice Kunhikrishnan, after listening to both sides, appeared visibly concerned about how such an objection progressed without proper supporting documents. At one point he remarked that deleting a candidate’s name without deeper scrutiny, particularly this close to the nomination deadline, could “affect the very fairness of the democratic exercise.”
The bench noted, “A girl aged 24 years shall not be denied her right to participate in the election for technical reason.” The judge continued with an almost conversational tone, which momentarily softened the courtroom: “In these type of cases, the winner should be democracy and not technicality or party politics.”
He stressed that documents produced by the petitioner should be evaluated properly and not brushed aside due to hurried administrative action. The court appeared particularly uneasy with the timeline — only four days remained before nominations closed, and once the electoral roll freezes, no corrections can be made.
Another important observation came when the bench pointed out that the complainant had not even attended the hearing on the objection. “Then what was the basis of the enquiry?” the judge asked, looking directly at the government side. There was no clear answer from the officials.
Decision
Taking note of the urgency, the court directed the State Election Commission - not the District Collector - to examine Vyshna’s documents and decide the matter on priority. Justice Kunhikrishnan ordered that the Commission must pass an appropriate order on or before 19 November 2025, giving the petitioner a fighting chance to contest.
The court also instructed that both Vyshna and the complainant, Dhanesh Kumar, must appear before the Commission for a hearing on 18 November 2025. The matter has been posted for further consideration on 20 November 2025.
With the High Court’s intervention, the young candidate now waits to see whether her name - and her political hopes - will return to the voters list before time runs out.
Case Title: Vyshna S.L vs State Election Commission – Voter List Deletion Before Local Body Polls
Court: Kerala High Court, Ernakulam
Bench: Justice P.V. Kunhikrishnan
Case No.: WP(C) 43131 of 2025
Date of Order: 17 November 2025
Petitioner: Vyshna S.L, 24-year-old candidate from Congress
Respondents: State Election Commission, Electoral Registration Officer, Dhanesh Kumar (objector), Joint Director of Municipalities, District Collector
