What Is the Case Linked to Meenakshi Natarajan’s Rejected Rajya Sabha Nomination?

Congress leader Meenakshi Natarajan was rejected from the Rajya Sabha nominations from Madhya Pradesh with BJP alleging that she failed to disclose a pending court case in the state of Telangana, while the congress insists that there are no criminal cases against Meenakshi and that the nomination was wrongly denied.

Amid all the chaos, the centre of the row is said to be a private complaint and not a case. The complaint was filed by a former congress worker from Telangana alleging that she was harassed and molested by party colleagues. She also alleged that the senior leaders from the party, including Meenakshi Natarajan herself, failed to take an action despite repeated requests and representations.

The controversy stems from a pending private complaint presented before a Hyderabad Court in which Natarajan has been named by the complainant. The BJP contents that the congress leader failed to disclose the case in her election affidavit and therefore her nomination form was incomplete, which led to the rejection. However, the congress maintains that – no criminal case is pending against Natarajan and that she was merely issued a court notice in a private complaint, which does not require any disclosure under election rules.

Cause of the complaint

As per the complaint, the dispute dates back to the year 2022 when the complainant accused a congress colleague of molestation and harassment. She claimed in the complaint that she repeatedly brought up the issue in front of the senior leaders of the party and sought justice and disciplinary actions against the accused, but no actions were taken.

Speaking before the media, the woman alleged that the accused wielded considerable influence within the party as his family members were IAS officers. She further claimed that many attempts were made to shut the matter down and that she faced resistance whenever she tried to take any action.

The complainant said that she demanded suspension of the accused and approached many congress leaders of the state over the years.

She further claimed that when Meenakshi Natarajan became the Congress in-charge for Telangana, she personally met her and sought action against the accused. She also mentioned that Natarajan assured her that the matter would be looked into and indicated that the accused has been suspended. However, she mentioned that no formal suspension order was ever shown to her and that the justice remained unserved.

“I only want justice” said the complainant, arguing that political parties have disciplinary mechanisms and that her repeated requests for action were ignored.

Why was Meenakshi named in the complaint?

According to reports, the woman approached a Hyderabad Magistrate Court through a private complaint in September 2025. Beside the man accused of molestation, she also named several congress leaders, including Meenakshi Natarajan, alleging that they failed to act on her complaints despite being informed of the matter and allegations.

However, the complainant’s contention is not that Natarajan was involved in the alleged molestation itself, but that as a senior leader of the party and Telangana in-charge it was her duty and responsibility to ensure action against the accused which she failed to do despite being informed about the matter.

Natarajan subsequently filed a response before the court. According to the complainant, Natarajan’s stand was that the matter was a personal case to which the complainant later objected. She argued that the allegations of molestation and harassment could not be treated merely as a personal case.

The Hyderabad Court issued a notice to Natarajan in 2025 seeking her response to the complaint. Congress leaders have argued that the notice was issued under Section 223 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) as part of preliminary proceedings and was intended to seek her participation in the matter. They maintain that no criminal charges have been framed against Natarajan and that no further substantive action has been taken by the trial court so far.

The case remains at a preliminary stage as the hearings still continue.

The nomination controversy

The controversy erupted during scrutiny of nominations for the June 18 Rajya Sabha polls for Madhya Pradesh.

BJP candidate Mahesh Kewat objected to Meenakshi Natarajan’s nomination, alleging that she failed to disclose the Telangana Court matter in her affidavit. After examining the objection, the Returning Officer rejected her nomination. The officer held that material facts relating to the case had not been disclosed. Officials said that she was given an opportunity to furnish details but she failed to do so.

The rejection dramatically altered the electoral arithmetic in Madhya Pradesh, bringing the BJP closer to winning all three Rajya Sabha seats from the state.

The Congress, however, has maintained that there is no criminal case against Natarajan, who has called the cancellation as unlawful and politically motivated. The party argues that she had only received a court notice in a private complaint and that such a notice did not amount to a criminal case requiring disclosure in the nomination papers.

The party has approached the Election Commission seeking reversal of the Returning Officer's decision and termed the rejection a violation of established legal principles.

Election law experts note that candidates are required to disclose pending criminal matters on Form 26. In a Form 26 affidavit, a candidate should ensure transparency by publicly declaring the candidate's criminal history, assets, liabilities, educational qualifications and financial obligations.

This article is written by Divya Sharma, a student of Kristu Jayanti Deemed to be University, interning with Deccan Chronicle.