Rajesh Kumar. S

S. Rajeshkumar, 51, is a two-term MLA representing Killiyoor constituency in Kanyakumari district and currently serves as the Leader of the Congress Legislative Party in the Tamil Nadu Legislative Assembly since February 2024. A post-graduate who attended LMS School in Palliyadi, Rajeshkumar has established himself as a key Congress figure in southern Tamil Nadu, winning his seat with impressive margins—51,494 votes in 2016 and 55,400 votes in 2021. His rise from constituency MLA to legislative party leader demonstrates his growing influence within the Tamil Nadu Congress organization. However, his political career carries significant legal baggage. His affidavit declares 13 criminal cases including 6 serious IPC charges—most notably Section 307 (Attempt to Murder), Section 369 (Kidnapping child under 10 years), Section 332 and 353 (Assaulting public servants), and Section 148 (Rioting with deadly weapons). These charges span a range of alleged offenses from rioting and criminal trespass to extremely serious accusations involving violence against public servants and kidnapping. The nature and number of these cases raise important questions about his conduct, though no recent media coverage of ongoing legal proceedings was found. Despite the criminal cases, Rajeshkumar has maintained electoral dominance in Killiyoor, a traditional Congress bastion where fishing communities form a significant voter base. His declared assets of ₹4.61 crores (with liabilities of ₹63.5 lakhs) appear reasonable for a two-term MLA with no previous asset data available for comparison. He maintains a notably low public profile with minimal social media presence or media coverage beyond election results, which is unusual for a legislative party leader in the social media age. Voters in Killiyoor should weigh his consistent electoral victories and recent elevation to party leadership against the serious criminal charges on record. The combination of strong local support and grave legal allegations presents a complex picture—suggesting either effective constituency service that voters value despite legal concerns, or insufficient public scrutiny of serious charges that deserve greater attention.