Khera, chairman of the Congress media and publicity department, accused the RSS of operating with extraordinary influence while avoiding formal accountability. He used unusually severe language to describe the Sangh’s ideological character, saying that beneath the surface of a “Sanghi” lay a “casteist communal monster”. His remarks have escalated a confrontation that began with Kharge’s letter to RSS chief Mohan Bhagwat seeking details of the organisation’s legal status, funding sources, expenditure, permissions and tax compliance.
The dispute has placed the RSS’s institutional structure at the centre of a wider political battle between Congress and the BJP. Kharge, who serves in the Karnataka government, has argued that an organisation with a wide social and political footprint cannot claim exemption from transparency norms. His position is that voluntary, cultural or ideological status cannot place any group outside the ambit of law, especially when its activities intersect with public life.
Bhagwat rejected the demand, saying the RSS functions openly and does not require registration. He said registration was necessary only for organisations seeking government funds and invoked the example of Hindu dharma not being registered. Congress leaders seized on that formulation, saying it blurred the line between a religion and a private organisation with defined leadership, cadre structures and affiliated activities.
Kharge responded by saying he had never asked for Hinduism to be registered and that the RSS should not equate itself with a faith practised by millions. He maintained that his questions were directed at an organisation, not a religion. He also said any misunderstanding could be addressed, but insisted that the RSS and Bhagwat must first answer the questions raised on legal identity and finances.
The BJP has accused Congress of targeting the RSS for political gain and attempting to polarise opinion in Karnataka. Party leaders have described Kharge’s demand as an ideological attack rather than an administrative concern. Some BJP figures have also sought to frame the controversy around Kharge’s caste identity and political lineage, prompting a sharp reply from the minister that he follows the values of B R Ambedkar and fears no one.
The RSS, founded in 1925, remains one of the country’s most influential ideological organisations. Its supporters describe it as a volunteer-based cultural body engaged in social service, discipline-building and nationalist work. Its critics argue that its lack of formal registration and opaque financial structure are incompatible with the scale of its influence over politics, education, social mobilisation and affiliated groups.
Khera’s intervention reflects a broader Congress attempt to make transparency around the RSS a national political issue rather than a Karnataka-specific exchange. By backing Kharge, he has signalled that the party intends to press questions about legal accountability, organisational financing and the relationship between the RSS and BJP ahead of future electoral battles.
The controversy has also revived older debates over whether the RSS should be treated as a private voluntary association, a cultural movement, or a political force operating through allied organisations. Congress has long argued that the RSS plays a decisive role in shaping BJP ideology and governance priorities. The BJP and the Sangh reject such criticism, saying the RSS is a social organisation with no need to answer politically motivated charges.
Kharge’s letter reportedly asked why an organisation with extensive activities should not follow registration practices applicable to smaller associations, trusts and non-profit entities. He questioned whether the RSS receives donations, how its funds are accounted for, what permissions govern its programmes and whether its units comply with tax rules. These questions have helped Congress shift the debate from ideology alone to administrative accountability.
