Munish Sood
Mandi
The alleged “cash-for-ticket” controversy within the Haryana unit of the Congress party has taken a serious legal turn, with the Delhi Police registering a formal FIR, intensifying political scrutiny over the party’s candidate selection process.
The case stems from a complaint filed by Suchitra, former State General Secretary of the Haryana Mahila Congress, who has accused senior party functionaries of accepting large sums of money in exchange for promising Assembly election tickets. Among those named in the complaint are Congress Organisation General Secretary K.C. Venugopal, MP K. Suresh, and Shahab Ahmed Khan, personal assistant to senior leader Priyanka Gandhi, along with others.
Acting on the complaint, Delhi Police registered FIR No. 0011/2026 at North Avenue Police Station under relevant provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, including Sections 61(2), 318(4), and 316(2). The FIR also names Ansh Ali, said to be associated with K.C. Venugopal.
Police sources confirmed that the FIR was lodged after Suchitra and her husband Gaurav appeared before investigators and submitted statements along with what they described as supporting evidence. Officials indicated that the matter is now under detailed investigation, and further legal steps will be taken based on the findings.
At the centre of the controversy is the allegation that nearly ₹7 crore was paid to secure a party ticket, a claim that, if substantiated, could have far-reaching implications for the party’s internal functioning and public credibility.
Gaurav, who has backed the complaint, asserted that the allegations are supported by “credible and documented evidence.” He further claimed that the involvement in the alleged racket may not be limited to those currently named, indicating that at least three more MPs could be implicated. He also warned of further disclosures if the alleged payments are not returned.
The Congress party, however, has strongly rejected the allegations. Haryana Congress President Rao Dan Singh had earlier dismissed the charges as “baseless and politically motivated,” questioning the timing of the accusations and asking why such claims were being raised nearly a year after the purported transactions.
Despite these denials, the registration of the FIR has added a significant legal dimension to the controversy, potentially escalating it beyond political rhetoric into a matter of judicial scrutiny. The development is likely to fuel political debate, particularly at a time when electoral transparency and internal party democracy remain under sharp public focus.
Delhi Police officials have maintained that the investigation will proceed in a fair and impartial manner, with all evidence being carefully examined. Statements from the accused and other relevant individuals are expected to be recorded as part of the ongoing probe.
As the case unfolds, it is poised to become a key political flashpoint, with implications not only for the individuals named but also for the broader discourse on accountability in electoral politics.
