New Delhi, April 23 (IANS) The Congress on Thursday wrote to the Election Commission of India (ECI) raising objections to the issuance of show-cause notices to party president Mallikarjun Kharge, alleging “inconsistencies in the notices and insufficient time to respond”.
In a “summary response” sent by AICC General Secretary (Communications) Jairam Ramesh, the party said it had received two notices bearing the same reference number dated April 22, signed by different officials, without any clarification on whether one superseded the other.
The party pointed out that one notice referred to a complaint by Trinamool Congress leader Derek O’Brien dated April 21, while another version uploaded on the ECI website did not mention the complainant. It said this reflected a “casual and routine manner” of issuing notices based solely on complaints from ruling parties without due scrutiny.
“We are in receipt of two notices with the same number, F. No. 437/TN-LA/2026/SS-I (MCC Complaint), both dated 22.04.2026 and signed by two different officials of the Commission. If one of the notices was withdrawn, there is no mention of it in either of the notices. We would like to draw your attention to the fact that one of the notices even mentions that the so-called violation of the model code of conduct was based on a complaint by Shri Derek O’Brien of the All India Trinamool Congress dated 21.04.2026. The other notice, which is also uploaded on your website, has strangely dropped his name as the complainant,” the Congress letter read.
The Congress also objected to the 24-hour deadline given to respond, calling it inadequate, especially during an ongoing election campaign. It sought one week’s time to file a detailed reply and requested a hearing by a senior delegation of party leaders.
In its response, the Congress cited two instances which it said amounted to violations of the Model Code of Conduct (MCC).
The party referred to the Prime Minister’s address following the failure of the government to pass the 131st Constitutional Amendment, alleging that remarks made during the speech targeted the Congress and were delivered at a time “when multiple states were going to elections”.
It also cited a statement attributed to Home Minister Amit Shah, shared on the BJP’s official social media platforms, which the Congress described as a “quid pro quo” promise offering financial benefits in exchange for votes.
The Congress argued that such statements fall within the ambit of undue influence and bribery under Section 123 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951.
The party said these instances appeared to have “escaped” the Commission’s attention, even as action was initiated against the opposition.
On the remarks that led to the notice, the Congress said Kharge had already issued a clarification, stating that his comments had been taken out of context. It quoted the clarification to say that the reference was to actions of institutions such as the ED, IT and CBI, and not a personal remark against PM Modi.
The Congress also argued that the clarification was already in the public domain and accused the Commission of proceeding without considering the full context. It said the move appeared to overlook the explanation in order to initiate action.
“It almost seems that an attempt is being made to deliberately overlook the clear and unequivocal explanation about the context in which the words were uttered, so as to find some way to take action against the Congress president. Unfortunately, it smacks of ulterior motives,” the letter read.
“The statement of the Hon’ble Congress President is sufficiently clear, and no member of the general public can claim otherwise. We categorically state that there is no violation of the MCC or any other laws.
“We also need hardly remind you of the numerous instances we have filed complaints against the PM and the HM, and NO ACTION was taken by you in the past,” the letter said.
The letter also objected to the language used in the notices, alleging that officials had threatened action without adequate grounds and without reconciling the existence of two separate notices. It said the process followed was contrary to the principles of natural justice.
“We would also like to strongly object to the language adopted by your officials wherein they threaten to take action without making any further reference and despite the fact that they seem to have issued two different notices in a casual manner,” it added.
Reiterating its demand, the Congress urged the Commission to grant additional time to file a detailed response and to allow a hearing. It also suggested that the ECI review past records to ensure consistency in handling such matters.
“Furthermore, there seems to be non-application of mind in issuing the notices, and they have given a mere 24 hours to file a reply despite knowing the hectic election schedule. We reiterate our position for an extension to file a detailed reply on law and a hearing,” the letter said.
–IANS
pgh/uk