The student alleged that Khan sought to mobilise approximately 100 college students for a protest associated with Congress leader Rahul Gandhi’s Save Democracy campaign. She said participants were offered between ₹200 and ₹500, alongside food, refreshments and transport. There has been no independent confirmation that any payments were made.
Her account, made public on Wednesday, November 11, also described messages allegedly circulated through a college group containing roughly 1,000 members. She claimed the recruitment efforts included offers of free Rapido rides and benefits linked to food delivery services. The authenticity and full context of the messages have not been independently established.
The allegations concern Khan, a student associated with Delhi University’s Ramanujan College, whose organisational status has become a separate point of contention. The NSUI, Congress’s student wing, says it suspended him during the Delhi University Students’ Union elections for indiscipline and activities contrary to the organisation’s interests.
The complainant disputed the organisation’s account of its response, alleging that Khan stepped down only after criticism intensified and questioning the timing of the suspension communication. Her assertion that a letter was issued retrospectively remains unverified. Neither account, by itself, establishes when Khan ceased to represent the student organisation.
The controversy has also drawn intervention from the Akhil Bharatiya Vidyarthi Parishad (ABVP), a rival student organisation, which has demanded an investigation into separate allegations involving approaches to female students. Its demands extend to scrutiny of possible financial transactions and other suspected links, none of which have been established through a publicly disclosed investigation.
The female student alleged that messages circulated among newcomers invited young women to accompany non-resident visitors in return for payments ranging from ₹10,000 to ₹30,000. She claimed the messages specified appearance and age requirements and included offers of travel and access to a Diljit Dosanjh concert. These are allegations rather than verified descriptions of any arrangement.
The NSUI has condemned the alleged conduct and maintained that Khan had already been suspended. That position distances the organisation from his purported actions but does not resolve the student’s questions about the timing of disciplinary measures or the provenance of the messages. No independently verified response from Khan to the specific cash-for-protest allegation was available.
The accusation involving the election protest has prompted questions about whether participants in political demonstrations were being offered inducements. The student’s testimony does not establish that Congress, Rahul Gandhi or senior NSUI officials authorised payments, knew about the alleged offers or funded them. Nor does an offer, if proved, necessarily demonstrate that money changed hands.
The protest she described forms part of a wider campaign challenging the Election Commission’s handling of electoral matters. Student groups and opposition activists have demanded Kumar’s resignation, citing concerns about electoral rolls and the commission’s independence. Those political allegations remain distinct from the claims now directed at Khan.
NSUI activists demonstrated in central Delhi in October, demanding Kumar’s removal. During one protest around Connaught Place, police detained participants, while the organisation alleged that women activists had been mistreated. The dispute over policing was separate from the allegations about student recruitment and does not establish a connection with the payments described by the complainant.
The student’s allegations have nevertheless intensified scrutiny of recruitment practices in campus politics, where rival organisations compete for participation and influence. The question for any formal inquiry would be whether the communications were genuine, who circulated them, and whether the purported incentives were actually offered or delivered.
The student also called for accountability from NSUI leaders and urged Rahul Gandhi to address the matter. Those demands are part of her complaint, not evidence of involvement by the Congress leadership. The ABVP’s call for a broader investigation likewise represents a political demand rather than a finding of wrongdoing.
Ramanujan College has separately been identified in accounts of disciplinary action involving Khan. The distinction between any college-level suspension and the NSUI’s organisational suspension is material: they are decisions by different bodies, governed by different procedures. The dates and precise terms of those disciplinary actions require confirmation from the respective institutions.
