In a dramatic, time-bound operation, Telangana BJP leaders played a pivotal behind-the-scenes role in the rejection of Congress leader and former MP Meenakshi Natarajan’s nomination for a Rajya Sabha seat from Madhya Pradesh, highlighting the growing importance of legal scrutiny and rapid-response political coordination in high-stakes electoral contests.

Party sources described the sequence as a race against time that unfolded over four hours, triggered by a query from the national leadership on whether any case was pending against Ms. Natarajan in Hyderabad, where she currently serves as AICC in-charge.

Caught off guard by the query, a senior Telangana BJP functionary initiated a rapid verification exercise, mobilising the party’s legal cell and setting off what insiders described as a wild goose chase. The urgency stemmed from the narrow window available to challenge nominations before scrutiny deadlines closed.

The first phase of the search focused on conventional avenues, with police stations across the city checking for any FIRs registered against the Congress leader. However, this effort yielded no results. “The initial two hours were unproductive, as no direct criminal case surfaced,” a senior BJP source said, underscoring the uncertainty surrounding the operation.

The breakthrough came during the second phase, when the legal team shifted strategy and reached out to practising advocates to ascertain whether any private complaints had been filed in court. This line of enquiry proved decisive. An advocate tipped off the team about a private petition filed in a Nampally court by a woman, primarily against Congress leader Kumbham Shiv Kumar Reddy, in which Ms. Natarajan and several others were named as respondents.

With time running out, the BJP legal teams next challenge was to secure documentary proof. According to party insiders, the team managed to obtain copies of both the private petition and the court notice issued to all seven respondents, a critical step that transformed informal leads into actionable evidence.

However, the most crucial element remained whether Ms. Natarajan had responded to the notice. By around 3 p.m., the BJP leaders had gathered the complete set of documents, including the counter filed by the Congress leader. This enabled the party to present a comprehensive complaint before the Returning Officer.

Based on the material submitted, the Returning Officer examined the case and ultimately rejected Ms. Natarajan’s nomination, a decision that reportedly caught Congress leaders off guard and triggered political ripples beyond Madhya Pradesh.

For her part, Ms. Natarajan, in her counter to the court, denied all allegations, describing the complaint as politically motivated and aimed at tarnishing her reputation. She asserted that her role in Telangana was strictly organisational and administrative, involving no personal engagement with the primary accused, Mr. Reddy.

She further clarified that she had no personal relationship with him and had never interacted with him in any private capacity, seeking to distance herself from the allegations that formed the basis of the petition.