Can A Private Complaint Derail A Nomination? Inside Congress' Fight For Meenakshi Natarajan

Published 10 June 2026 · politics

Can A Private Complaint Derail A Nomination? Inside Congress' Fight For Meenakshi Natarajan Reported By, Edited By Last Updated: June 10, 2026, 15:23 IST The

Can A Private Complaint Derail A Nomination? Inside Congress' Fight For Meenakshi Natarajan Reported By, Edited By Last Updated: June 10, 2026, 15:23 IST The returning officer (RO) of Madhya Pradesh rejected Congress pick Meenakshi Natarajan’s nomination on the grounds that she failed to disclose an offence against her Rapid Read Meenakshi Natarajan As Madhya Pradesh watches with intrigue the unfolding Rajya Sabha election row between Congress and BJP, the Election Commission is tasked with a question that could have wider implications—Should a candidate declare complaints against him/her even when no cognizance has been taken? A senior Congress delegation with KC Venugopal, Jairam Ramesh and legal eagles like Abhishek Manu Singhvi and Vivek Tankha, knocked on the EC’s door with this question on Wednesday. Cognizance vs Court Notice The returning officer (RO) of Madhya Pradesh rejected Congress pick Meenakshi Natarajan’s nomination on the grounds that she failed to disclose an offence against her. The case in question is a private complaint filed by a former associate of Natarajan, A Srilatha, in a Telangana court in 2022. The complainant had alleged abuse by Natarajan and the court had asked her to appear in the matter in September 2025.

The RO, in his order, had said that Natarajan failed to disclose this in Form 26 of her nomination. Congress, however, argued that since the court had not taken cognizance of the private complaint, Natarajan was not required to disclose the proceedings. “Form 26 asks the candidate to disclose the case number and the sections if an offence is being probed against him/her. In this case there is no FIR… hence no case number. What was Ms Natarajan supposed to disclose?" Rajya Sabha MP Vivek Tankha asked CNN-News18. ALSO READ | Last-Minute Jolt: How A Rajya Sabha Nomination Rejection Made Congress Recall A Flight From Runway Tankha pointed out that under BNS Section 223(2), a court issues notice to respondents in a private complaint case and a decision on cognizance is taken only after hearing both sides. Singhvi, who spoke before the EC, added: “The RO’s order is vitiated. There is no criminal case pending against Natarajan. No cognizance was taken. EC rules under 33A say that candidate should reveal case where charges have been framed. RO in his order has used the word “sangyan" which means cognizance ….this (RO’s charge is factually incorrect." EC’s Power Under Constitution Legal experts said prima facie, the Returning Officer is the last word on nomination scrutiny.