Was Congress's Meenakshi Natarajan's Rajya Sabha nomination valid? What law says
The Election Commission’s decision to reject Congress leader Meenakshi Natarajan’s nomination for the Rajya Sabha election has triggered a major political and legal controversy. Congress
The Election Commission’s decision to reject Congress leader Meenakshi Natarajan’s nomination for the Rajya Sabha election has triggered a major political and legal controversy. Congress reacted sharply, calling the move "egregious" and a "subversion of democracy", and urged the Election Commission to roll back the decision. Natarajan also appeared before the Election Commission on Wednesday to present her case. Natarajan’s Rajya Sabha nomination from Madhya Pradesh was rejected after the Returning Officer held that she had failed to disclose details of a pending court case in Telangana in her nomination affidavit. The BJP had objected to her nomination during scrutiny, alleging that she concealed material information related to the case. Read Full Story Sources in the Congress legal team told India Today that the party has argued the alleged “summons” issued by a Telangana court was merely part of a pre-cognisance inquiry and did not amount to formal criminal proceedings against her. According to the party, there was no direct allegation against Natarajan in the complaint itself. The ECI’s final decision was awaited at the time of writing this report. According to sources, Natarajan was named in a private complaint filed by a former Congress worker in Telangana. The complainant alleged that she had faced harassment and molestation by another former Congress worker. She further claimed that she had informed Natarajan, who was then the AICC in-charge for the state, but no action was taken against the accused.
A magistrate court in Hyderabad issued a notice to Natarajan in 2025 seeking her response to the complaint. Congress sources said the notice was issued under Section 223 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) and was only meant to secure her participation in the preliminary hearing. No further action has been taken by the trial court so far. Party sources claimed the Returning Officer "appears to have confused this preliminary inquiry notice with a formal summons issued after cognisance of an offence", leading to the rejection of the nomination. WHAT DOES THE LAW SAY? Section 33A of the Representation of the People Act mandates disclosure by election candidates only in two situations If the candidate is accused of an offence punishable with imprisonment of two years or more in a pending case where charges have been framed by a competent court. If the candidate has been convicted of an offence and sentenced to imprisonment for one year or more. Section 223 of the BNSS lays down the procedure for a magistrate conducting a preliminary inquiry on a private criminal complaint. The provision states that no cognisance of an offence can be taken without first giving the accused an opportunity to be heard. The magistrate is required to examine the complainant and witnesses before deciding whether further proceedings are warranted. In the Meenakshi Natarajan case, the Congress has argued that the proceedings were only at this preliminary stage.
The BriefWire