The rejection of Meenakshi Natarajan’s nomination for the Madhya Pradesh Rajya Sabha election has intensified a political row, with Congress alleging democratic impropriety and BJP defending the decision.

The contest for the third Rajya Sabha seat from Madhya Pradesh took a dramatic turn after Congress candidate Meenakshi Natarajan’s nomination paper was rejected during scrutiny, significantly strengthening BJP nominee Mahesh Kewat’s prospects of entering the Upper House.

The development has triggered a sharp political confrontation in Bhopal, with the Congress describing the move as a “murder of democracy”, while the BJP has maintained that the Returning Officer acted strictly in accordance with election rules.

With three Rajya Sabha seats from Madhya Pradesh falling vacant, the BJP was already expected to secure two seats comfortably based on its numerical strength in the Assembly. The third seat had emerged as the focal point of the contest between Kewat and Natarajan. Following the rejection of the Congress candidate’s nomination, Kewat’s path appears largely unobstructed unless legal intervention alters the situation.

Scrutiny Process Turns Contentious

The scrutiny of nomination papers was conducted at the Madhya Pradesh Assembly on June 9. According to information available from the proceedings, nomination papers submitted by the BJP’s three candidates were examined first and found to be in order. No objections were raised during that stage.

The controversy began when scrutiny of Natarajan’s nomination commenced. BJP representatives submitted a written objection alleging that she had failed to disclose details related to a criminal matter pending before a court in Telangana.

The objection centred on an affidavit filed along with the nomination papers. BJP leaders argued that information regarding a private complaint and subsequent court proceedings had not been fully disclosed.

Sources familiar with the proceedings said the objection led to intense discussions inside the Returning Officer’s chamber. Congress representatives contested the BJP’s interpretation and sought to defend the validity of the nomination.

Hours of Deliberation

The issue remained under consideration for several hours. After an initial round of arguments, the Returning Officer reportedly indicated that a decision could be taken later. However, BJP leaders pressed for an immediate ruling.

A second round of hearings was conducted in the evening, during which both sides presented their submissions. By around 6.30 pm, the Returning Officer issued an order rejecting Natarajan’s nomination.

The order cited provisions contained in the election handbook and concluded that the affidavit accompanying the nomination was incomplete.

Basis of Rejection

According to the Returning Officer’s findings, a private complaint had been filed against Natarajan in a Telangana court and a summons had been issued on September 17, 2025.

The order noted three key aspects. First, the affidavit did not mention the private complaint. Second, the court proceedings were considered active because a summons had already been issued. Third, the candidate was presumed to be aware of the matter since she had responded to the summons.

Based on these observations, the Returning Officer concluded that material information had been omitted from Form 26 and ordered the nomination to be rejected under provisions cited from the handbook governing election procedures.

Legal Questions Emerge

The decision has also sparked debate among legal and constitutional experts.

Former Madhya Pradesh Assembly Principal Secretary Bhagwandev Israni questioned whether the rejection fully aligned with the procedural safeguards outlined in the handbook. He argued that candidates are generally expected to be given an opportunity to correct defects before a nomination is rejected on technical grounds.

Israni also pointed to provisions indicating that incorrect or incomplete disclosures in an affidavit do not automatically warrant rejection of a nomination. He further noted that the existence of a complaint or issuance of a summons does not by itself result in disqualification under the Representation of the People Act. Disqualification typically follows conviction and sentencing by a competent court.

Congress Weighs Next Move

Congress leaders staged a protest outside the Election Commission office in Bhopal following the decision and signalled that legal action is under consideration.

Party leaders are examining multiple options, including seeking intervention from the Election Commission and challenging the Returning Officer’s order before the High Court. Election law experts suggest that a court challenge would be the quickest route if the party wishes to secure immediate relief before the Rajya Sabha election process concludes.

For now, the rejection of Meenakshi Natarajan’s nomination has reshaped the Rajya Sabha contest in Madhya Pradesh and set the stage for a legal and political battle that could continue beyond the election itself.