Congress Slams BJP-EC Over ‘Seat Chori’ After Meenakshi Natarajan’s Rajya Sabha Nomination Rejection

New Delhi (IANS): The Congress on Friday mounted a sharp attack on the BJP and the Election Commission, alleging collusion in the rejection of senior party leader Meenakshi Natarajan’s nomination for the Rajya Sabha elections in Madhya Pradesh.

The party claimed in a statement that the BJP lacked sufficient numbers in the Madhya Pradesh Assembly to secure a third Rajya Sabha seat and therefore resorted to “underhand tactics” to eliminate its rival candidate from the contest.

The opposition party alleged that the Returning Officer rejected Natarajan’s nomination on “flawed and unreasonable grounds” relating to her alleged non-disclosure of a criminal case in her election affidavit.

According to the Congress, no criminal case is currently pending against Natarajan and no court has taken cognisance of any offence against her. The party maintained that the legal notice from the Returning Officer pertained only to a private complaint and did not constitute a pending criminal case requiring disclosure under Form 26 of the nomination papers.

The Congress argued that Form 26 requires candidates to disclose only those criminal cases in which courts have framed charges or taken cognisance of an offence. Since Natarajan’s case met neither condition, the party said she legally and validly wrote “Not Applicable” in the relevant section of the affidavit.

Questioning the Returning Officer’s decision, the Congress claimed that the officer incorrectly stated that a court had taken cognisance of the alleged offence. It cited provisions of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), asserting that the magistrate had merely issued a notice to provide an opportunity for a hearing and had not initiated criminal proceedings.

The opposition party further accused the ECI of applying “double standards” by treating the nomination of Rajya Sabha candidate Parimal Nathwani differently in Jharkhand.

The Congress alleged that Nathwani’s nomination papers contained several defects, including discrepancies in the name mentioned in the affidavit, incomplete responses in Form 26, and omissions relating to asset and tax disclosures. Despite these alleged shortcomings, the party claimed that the Returning Officer in Jharkhand allowed clarifications and accepted the nomination.

Citing a Supreme Court judgment in Prahladdas Khandelwal vs Narendra Kumar Salave (1973), the Congress contended that election laws do not empower Returning Officers to permit candidates to rectify substantial defects during scrutiny.

“The BJP and the ECI are partners in crime in this latest instance of seat chori,” the party said.