A Hyderabad court has returned a private complaint filed against senior Congress leader Meenakshi Natarajan and several others, holding that it lacked jurisdiction to entertain the matter. The development comes days after Natarajan’s Rajya Sabha nomination was rejected on the grounds that she had not disclosed the pending court proceedings in her election affidavit, despite the absence of any criminal case or FIR against her.
The court of the Fourth Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate A Swarnalatha held on Friday that it did not have the jurisdiction to take cognisance of a complaint involving sitting legislators and returned the petition to the complainant with liberty to approach the appropriate forum for redressal of her grievances.
The complaint had been filed by a former woman corporator against seven respondents, including Natarajan and four sitting MLAs. The complainant had approached the court through a protest petition after police authorities in Hyderabad and Bengaluru closed her complaints alleging sexual harassment and criminal intimidation by Congress leader K. Shiva Kumar Reddy, former president of the party’s Narayanpet district unit. The police had filed closure reports citing lack of evidence.
According to the complainant, the Congress leadership failed to take action against Reddy despite allegations that he had sexually harassed her and threatened her life. Dissatisfied with the closure reports submitted by the Panjagutta Police Station, Osmania University Police Station and Cubbon Park Police Station, she sought judicial intervention through a protest petition.
Senior advocate Ravi Shankar Jandhyala, appearing for Natarajan and the other respondents, argued before the court that no First Information Report had ever been registered against Natarajan and that no criminal liability could be attributed to her for the alleged conduct of another individual. He submitted that the complaint was not maintainable and that the court lacked territorial and subject-matter jurisdiction to proceed with the matter.
The proceedings, which began after the complaint was filed in August 2025, remained pending for several months primarily on the issue of whether the court could take cognisance of the allegations. Natarajan had earlier responded to the court summons by contending that no prima facie case was made out against her and seeking dismissal of the complaint.
After hearing submissions from both sides, the magistrate accepted the jurisdictional objection raised by the respondents. The court called upon the defence to substantiate its contention regarding lack of jurisdiction. Following the filing of a memorandum by the respondents, the court accepted the submission and returned the complaint to the petitioner.
The ruling came after Natarajan had already suffered a major political setback. Her nomination for the Rajya Sabha was rejected earlier this week due to non-disclosure of the pending court proceedings in her election affidavit. Congress leaders have maintained that the rejection was legally unsustainable because no criminal case had been registered against her and no crime number existed that required disclosure under election laws.
Telangana Congress Committee president B. Mahesh Kumar Goud alleged that sensitive information relating to the proceedings had been deliberately leaked and indicated that the State government would examine how details of the matter entered the public domain. He further alleged political interference by the Bharatiya Janata Party, the Union Government and the Prime Minister’s Office.
Telangana Chief Minister A. Revanth Reddy also defended Natarajan, stating that she had no authority to adjudicate or resolve a dispute between private individuals and was summoned only as part of routine judicial procedure arising from a private complaint. He maintained that election affidavits require disclosure of pending criminal cases and not mere court summons.
The complainant, however, alleged that she had been subjected to sustained pressure throughout the proceedings. She claimed that a large number of advocates appeared in support of the respondents during the hearing and alleged attempts to influence or obstruct the judicial process. She further asserted that her original complaints were closed because of political pressure and maintained that repeated representations to the Congress leadership seeking action against Reddy had yielded no result.
At the same time, the complainant expressed support for Natarajan and alleged that the BJP had benefited politically from the controversy surrounding the Rajya Sabha election. She stated that she remained a member of the Congress party despite being asked to stay away from organisational activities and indicated that she would file a fresh petition before the competent forum.
Meanwhile, the Supreme Court on June 12 declined to grant relief to Natarajan against the rejection of her Rajya Sabha nomination. The Court observed that she could pursue the statutory remedy of filing an election petition and accordingly dismissed her plea. The Hyderabad court’s subsequent decision returning the complaint has nevertheless provided legal relief to Natarajan, even though the order came after the rejection of her nomination had already taken effect.
The post Hyderabad court returns private complaint against Meenakshi Natarajan that led to rejection of her Rajya Sabha nomination appeared first on India Legal.