# Should children be used in election campaigns? A Madras HC ruling opens the debate

URL: https://upsc.help/current-affairs/2026-10-23/children-poll-campaign-madras-hc/
Date: 23 October 2026 (2026-10-23)
Source: The Hindu, Page 9
UPSC papers: GS2
Publisher: upsc.help (Pratidin), free and open-source UPSC Civil Services current affairs. Not affiliated with UPSC. Every fact was checked against the source reports by a separate review before publishing.

**In one line:** The Madras High Court found the use of children to sway parents' votes 'in bad taste' but not a legal ground to void an election, and called it 'a larger debate for the nation and Parliament to consider'.

The Hindu's opinion page on 23 October 2026 debated whether children should be involved in political campaigning, following a Madras High Court ruling. On 15 October 2026 Justice Bharatha Chakravarthy rejected an election petition filed by a DMK candidate against the TVK MLA elected from Salem North in the 2026 Tamil Nadu Assembly election (K. Sivakumar v. Rajendran R). The petition said that on 21 April 2026 TVK leader Joseph Vijay, now Chief Minister, had appealed to children to urge their parents and families to vote for his party, and that videos then showed children pressing, and in some cases threatening, relatives to vote for the candidate. It argued that this was undue influence, a corrupt practice under Section 123(2) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951.

The court held that an election petition is a statutory remedy and can succeed only on the grounds in Section 100 of the Act. Undue influence must be committed by the candidate, the candidate's agent, or another person with their consent, and the leader's appeal was not shown to have the candidate's consent. Even if children pestered their parents, adults made their own choice, so the petition disclosed no cause of action. The court called the use of children 'in bad taste' and said the videos reflected 'poor parenting'. Whether such conduct should be banned, or made a ground to set aside an election, was 'a larger debate for the nation and Parliament to consider'.

The Election Commission had issued a circular on 5 February 2024 asking parties not to use children in any form of campaigning, including carrying them at rallies or using them to recite poems, songs or other spoken words. The court held that even if the circular had the force of law, it could not be a ground to void the election. The debate on the opinion page turns on two ideas: children's right to express views under the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, and the concern that using a child's attachment to a celebrity leader to pressure parents imports consumer 'pester power' tactics into politics. Supporters of reform seek a precisely drawn law that separates genuine participation from manipulation.

## Prelims facts

- On 15 October 2026 the Madras High Court held that using children to persuade parents to vote is 'in bad taste' but not a ground to void an election.
- Undue influence under Section 123(2) of the RP Act must be by the candidate, the agent or a person acting with their consent.
- An election can be set aside only on the grounds in Section 100 of the RP Act; appeals lie to the Supreme Court under Section 116A.
- The Election Commission's circular of 5 February 2024 asks parties not to use children in any form of campaigning.
- The court left it to Parliament to decide whether to prohibit the practice or make it a ground to set aside an election.

## Quick recall

- **Date of the Madras HC ruling on children in the TVK campaign?** 15 October 2026, by Justice Bharatha Chakravarthy.
- **What did the court call the use of children in the campaign?** 'In bad taste', reflecting 'poor parenting', but not a ground to void the election.
- **Which section of the RP Act makes undue influence a corrupt practice?** Section 123(2).
- **Which section lists the grounds for declaring an election void?** Section 100 of the RP Act, 1951.
- **Under which section does an appeal lie to the Supreme Court in an election petition?** Section 116A of the RP Act.
- **Date of the EC circular asking parties not to use children in campaigns?** 5 February 2024.
- **Under which provision has the EC said it would act against recognised parties breaching its children advisory?** Paragraph 16A of the Election Symbols (Reservation and Allotment) Order, 1968.
- **When did India ratify the UNCRC?** 11 December 1992.

## Prelims practice question

With reference to election disputes in India, consider the following statements:
1. An election to a State Legislative Assembly can be challenged by an election petition in the High Court.
2. Undue influence is a corrupt practice under the Representation of the People Act, 1951.
3. Violation of an Election Commission advisory is by itself a ground in the Act for declaring an election void.
Which of the statements given above are correct?

(a) 1 and 2 only
(b) 2 and 3 only
(c) 1 and 3 only
(d) 1, 2 and 3

Answer: (a) 1 and 2 only. 1 is correct: election petitions are tried by High Courts. 2 is correct: Section 123(2) lists undue influence as a corrupt practice. 3 is wrong: the Madras High Court held that even if the EC's 2024 circular had the force of law, it would not be a ground to void the election.

## UPSC previous-year questions this connects to

- UPSC Mains 2022, GS2: Discuss the procedures to decide the disputes arising out of the election of a Member of the Parliament or State Legislature under The Representation of the People Act, 1951. What are the grounds on which the election of any returned candidate may be declared void? What remedy is available to the aggrieved party against the decision ? Refer to the case laws. (https://upsc.help/pyq/q352-procedures-decide-disputes-arising-out-election-member/)
  How to use this story in the answer: Cite the October 2026 Madras High Court ruling as a recent case showing that election petitions succeed only on Section 100 grounds and that corrupt practices need the candidate's consent.
- UPSC Mains 2022, GS2: Discuss the role of the Election Commission of India in the light of the evolution of the Model Code of Conduct. (https://upsc.help/pyq/q001-role-election-commission-india-light-evolution-model/)
  How to use this story in the answer: Use the EC's 2024 children advisory and the Madras ruling to show the limits of non-statutory EC guidance, a key theme in debates on the Model Code of Conduct.
- UPSC Prelims 2017, Prelims: Right to vote and to be elected in India is a (a) Fundamental Right (b) Natural Right (c) Constitutional Right (d) Legal Right (https://upsc.help/pyq/q005-right-vote-elected-india-fundamental-right-b/)

## Mains practice question

The use of children in election campaigns raises questions of electoral ethics that existing law does not answer. In the light of a recent Madras High Court ruling, examine the legal position and suggest a way forward. (150 words)

### Model answer

On 15 October 2026 the Madras High Court rejected an election petition alleging that a party leader's appeal to children to sway their parents amounted to undue influence, while calling the practice 'in bad taste'.

## Legal position
- An election petition is a statutory remedy; grounds are limited to Section 100 of the RP Act, 1951.
- Undue influence (Section 123(2)) must be by the candidate, agent or someone with their consent; the leader's appeal was not linked to the candidate.
- Adults retain free choice even if children pester them.
- The EC's 5 February 2024 circular is advisory; the court held it cannot void an election.

## Concerns
- Children have no electoral rights, yet are used to exploit family emotion.
- Exposure of minors to public pressure.

## Way forward
- Parliament could define such use as an electoral offence, as the court suggested.
- Link the EC advisory to the Symbols Order (paragraph 16A) for recognised parties.
- Distinguish genuine participation (UNCRC Article 12) from manipulation.

A narrow, clear law would protect children without curbing legitimate political expression.

## The basics

## Why this matters

Children cannot vote, yet parties increasingly use them in rallies, videos and social media to reach their parents. A Madras High Court ruling of 15 October 2026 called such use 'in bad taste' but held that it is not a ground to set aside an election, leaving the question to Parliament. The case is a compact lesson in how the Representation of the People Act, 1951 handles Undue influence under Section 123(2) and Election petitions under the RP Act.

## The case in brief

## Why the petition failed

An election can be set aside only on the grounds listed in Section 100 of the Act. Undue influence counts as a corrupt practice only if committed by the candidate, the candidate's agent, or someone acting with the candidate's or election agent's consent. The party leader's appeal was not shown to have the candidate's consent. The court also reasoned that children's persuasion does not override an adult voter's free choice.

## The rules today

The Election Commission's 2024 advisory on children has no penalty of its own. India is a party to the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, which protects a child's right to be heard but also requires protection from exploitation.

## Sources

- https://www.livelaw.in/high-court/madras-high-court/madras-high-court-cm-joseph-vijay-asking-kids-persuade-family-vote-tvk-not-corrupt-practice-555021
- https://organiser.org/2026/10/21/418966/bharat/tamil-nadu-madras-hc-says-using-children-in-poll-campaigns-is-in-bad-taste-calls-for-national-debate/
- https://www.barandbench.com/news/litigation/using-children-for-election-campaign-in-bad-taste-but-not-ground-to-invalidate-election-madras-high-court
- https://www.tribuneindia.com/news/india/dont-use-children-in-poll-campaign-election-commission-tells-parties-587709
- https://superkalam.com/current-affairs/23-10-2026/should-children-be-involved-in-political-campaigning-pg9-e4777a0f-9c46-4161-8218-b5900710b13a
- https://www.smilefoundationindia.org/blog/child-rights-india/