Shimla:
A formal complaint has been filed with the Election Commission, the Rajya Sabha Secretariat and the Returning Officer of the Himachal Pradesh Assembly against Rajya Sabha member Anurag Sharma, alleging concealment of assets and violation of election rules during the nomination process.
The complaint was submitted by Dharamshala-based advocate Nitasha Katoch, who has alleged that Sharma failed to disclose complete details of his assets in the election affidavit submitted with his nomination papers.
According to the complaint, Sharma, a resident of Bir village in Baijnath tehsil of Kangra district, was declared elected to the Rajya Sabha from Himachal Pradesh on March 7, 2026. However, it has been alleged that his election affidavit did not contain full and accurate details of his movable and immovable properties, which is mandatory under Section 33 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951.
The complaint states that candidates are required to disclose complete details of their own assets as well as those of their family members while filing nomination papers. Any deliberate concealment of such information is considered a violation of the law.
It further alleges that information available on the Election Commission’s portal indicates that several land properties owned by Sharma were not disclosed in the affidavit. These include land holdings in Baijnath and Multhan areas of Kangra district and in Jogindernagar of Mandi district, with specific account numbers and villages also mentioned in the complaint.
Apart from land assets, the complaint also claims that details related to a licensed firearm were not properly disclosed in the nomination documents.
The complaint also refers to Section 9A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, alleging that Sharma was functioning as a government contractor at the time of filing his nomination and had Public Works Department contracts worth around ₹16 crore in progress. Under the law, a person with subsisting government contracts can be disqualified from contesting elections.
Additionally, questions have been raised over the issuance of a certificate by the Assembly Secretariat, which the complaint alleges was granted in haste despite the existence of government contracts.
Advocate Nitasha Katoch has further stated that the matter may also attract action under Section 125A of the Representation of the People Act, which deals with penalties for furnishing false or incomplete information in election affidavits.
She has urged the Election Commission, the Rajya Sabha Secretariat and other concerned authorities to conduct a fair investigation and take appropriate legal action to ensure transparency and credibility in the electoral process.
