Meenakshi Natarajan RS rejection is Congress inside job, claims BJP

Legal experts say that a private complaint in preliminary enquiry stage would not constitute a criminal case against the respondent, Meenakshi Natarajan.

Hyderabad: Madhya Pradesh Minister Kailash Vijayvargiya’s comments on the rejection of All India Congress Committee (AICC) Telangana in-charge Meenakshi Natarajan’s Rajya Sabha nomination from MP have raised eyebrows in the political circles.

He claimed that an individual from Telangana Congress had sent a parchi (slip) to the Madhya Pradesh Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leadership, containing details of a case lodged against her at the Fourth Additional Chief Magistrate’s Court in the Nampally Courts Complex.

“How did we come to know unless someone from the Telangana Congress sent the slip? This is how Congress works. They are in power there,” he quipped.

He said there are a few Congress leaders allegedly miffed with Natarajan, and they were the ones who informed the Madhya Pradesh BJP about the ‘pending’ case.

Natarajan’s Rajya Sabha nomination was rejected after BJP’s candidate Mahesh Kewat lodged a complaint with the Returning Officer, paving the way for Kewat’s unopposed election.

Speculations after Vijayvargiya’s statement

Following Vijayvargiya’s remarks, the BRS’s social media handle and some individuals speculated that Chief Minister A Revanth Reddy could have been behind the alleged “dirty work,” claiming his differences with Meenakshi Natarajan.

They highlighted two episodes from 2025: The Kancha Gachibowli controversy, where Natarajan mediated between the government, Hyderabad University students and environmental activists over the felling of trees. Her intervention was seen as a direction from Leader of Opposition in the Lok Sabha, Rahul Gandhi.

The other was the Musi Riverfront Development Project. Natarajan had publicly slammed the Hyderabad Police for preventing activist Medha Patkar from meeting affected families in Chaderghat facing eviction. Natarajan had opined that a progressive political party would not require citizens to take permission.

However, Revanth Reddy and Telangana Pradesh Congress Committee (TPCC) President B Mahesh Kumar Goud accused the BJP of resorting to ‘Seat Chori‘ and damaging the democratic process by preventing Natarajan from being elected to the Rajya Sabha.

The case against Meenakshi Natarajan

The case against Meenakshi Natarajan stems from September 17, 2025, when a woman named A Srilatha filed a private petition at the Fourth Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate of Hyderabad’s Nampally Court against Kumbham Shivakumar Reddy, former District Congress Committee (DCC) President of Narayanpet, and others, including Natarajan.

The allegations included criminal intimidation, criminal defamation, criminal conspiracy and insulting the modesty of a woman.

The court had sent a notice to Meenakshi Natarajan under Section 223 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhitha (BNSS), to which she had filed a counter.

Srilatha’s move came years after she had filed the first complaint against Shivakumar Reddy in 2022, when she accused him of sexual harassment, molestation, intimidation and threats. The case failed to stand due to lack of evidence and was disposed of.

Natarajan was not an accused in Srilatha’s 2022 complaint. But in her 2025 private complaint, the woman claimed that her plea before the leader to take action against Reddy ended without any action.

According to NDTV, Congress has approached the Election Commission of India (ECI), demanding that the Returning Officer’s decision rejecting Natarajan’s nomination be reversed.

“The EC’s own law under Section 33A requires disclosure only in cases where charges have been framed by a court and where the offence carries a punishment of two years or more,” Congress Rajya Sabha MP Abhishek Manu Singhvi was quoted by NDTV.

He maintained that merely filing a private complaint or the existence of a case at a preliminary stage does not automatically require disclosure.

Singhvi reportedly argued with the ECI that Article 324 allows the EC to take corrective action when an election official’s decision undermines the fairness of the electoral process.

What legal experts say

Senior advocate D Suresh Kumar said the matter is still at the preliminary enquiry stage, during which statements will be recorded and the court will examine whether there is a prima facie case and sufficient grounds to proceed.

Only if the court accepts the protest petition will the witnesses be cross-examined. The private complaint will be officially accepted only if the court orders a criminal complaint.

“Mere lodging of a private complaint without a first information report (FIR) would not constitute a criminal case against the respondent, in this case, Meenakshi Natarajan,” Kumar said.