ChatGPT said:

Karnataka IT and BT Minister Priyank Kharge has reignited a political debate by questioning why the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS)—which calls itself the world’s largest volunteer organisation—has not been registered as a non-governmental organisation (NGO) under Indian law. His comments, made on Monday, come amid an ongoing controversy surrounding the RSS’s proposed route march in Chittapur, his home constituency in Kalaburagi district.

Speaking to reporters, Kharge took aim at what he described as the RSS’s lack of transparency and accountability. Citing legal norms that require all NGOs and voluntary organisations to register and disclose their financial sources, he asked why the RSS remains an exception. “If you are the world’s largest NGO, shouldn’t you be registered? Why are they so scared of Indian laws and the Indian Constitution?” Kharge said, according to a report by The Indian Express.

Kharge’s Questions on RSS’s Legal Status

Kharge argued that every legitimate voluntary organisation in India is mandated to register under the appropriate laws—such as the Societies Registration Act, Trust Act, or as a Section 8 company under the Companies Act—and to submit annual reports detailing their funding, expenditures, and donors. The RSS, he said, operates outside this framework while still enjoying wide-ranging influence across the country.

“Everybody knows everything about voluntary organisations or NGOs in the country, except the RSS. Why are they so secretive? Why aren’t they a registered organisation?” Kharge asked. “If they are confident about their work and intentions, why not come under the ambit of Indian law like everyone else?”

He further contended that the RSS’s unregistered status raises questions about its financial transparency, governance, and accountability. “We have rules for every other group—from religious trusts to small non-profits—yet the RSS manages to stay outside that system. Why should it be exempt?” he added.

Questions Over Marches and Public Events

The minister also raised concerns over how an unregistered organisation could be permitted to hold public events, including large-scale route marches. “Can an unregistered organisation be allowed to hold march-pasts across the country? What if anything happens—who will be held responsible? How can we allow organisations that don’t follow due process of law to organise such events?” he asked.

Kharge’s remarks came after the Chittapur district administration denied permission for the RSS’s proposed march, which was initially planned for October 19. Following the denial, the RSS approached the Karnataka High Court, proposing to reschedule the event to November 2. The court instructed the organisation to coordinate with the administration and local groups to avoid potential conflicts.

Clash of Events in Chittapur

The controversy deepened when it was revealed that Dalit groups had planned a parallel event in Chittapur on the same day as the rescheduled RSS march. Efforts by local authorities to mediate between the two sides failed to yield consensus. As per the court’s direction, a fresh meeting between representatives of both groups has been scheduled for March 7, leaving the fate of the march uncertain for now.

The episode has highlighted growing tensions between the ruling Congress government in Karnataka and the RSS-BJP ecosystem, with each side accusing the other of politicising the issue. While the RSS maintains that its activities are cultural and nationalist in nature, critics argue that they often carry political undertones and serve as a support base for the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP).

Criticism Over Security Cover

Kharge also questioned the security cover accorded to RSS chief Mohan Bhagwat, comparing it to that of senior Union ministers. “The protocol is meant for the Prime Minister, the Home Minister, and the External Affairs Minister. How is taxpayer money being spent on the world’s largest NGO’s chief? Why do they require so much security?” he asked.

His comments suggest that the Congress minister sees an inconsistency in the way state resources and legal privileges are extended to the RSS and its leadership. “If they are simply a volunteer organisation, why is their leader given protection equivalent to top government functionaries?” Kharge said.

Political Reactions and Broader Implications

The remarks have drawn responses from both Congress and RSS leadership, further intensifying the debate. Congress president Mallikarjun Kharge, Priyank Kharge’s father, has previously been critical of the RSS, calling it an organisation that operates “outside constitutional norms.” He has accused it of influencing the BJP-led Union government’s policies without accountability to the public.

On the other hand, RSS general secretary Dattatreya Hosabale has defended the organisation’s structure, arguing that it does not need to be registered since it is not an NGO in the conventional sense but a “cultural movement” dedicated to nation-building. The RSS has maintained that it operates through thousands of affiliated organisations—many of which are legally registered—and that its voluntary cadre structure is based on selfless service rather than formal membership or funding models.

This explanation, however, has done little to quiet critics who say that such an arrangement allows the RSS to wield enormous social and political power without being subject to public scrutiny. Legal experts have also pointed out that while there is no statutory requirement for all social or cultural associations to register, registration provides legitimacy, transparency, and legal accountability—particularly when such groups conduct mass events or hold property.

The Larger Context

The row in Chittapur is emblematic of the longstanding tension between the RSS and Congress, especially in states like Karnataka where both maintain strong grassroots networks. The RSS, founded in 1925, has historically resisted formal registration, arguing that its work is carried out by unpaid volunteers dedicated to national service. Yet, as its influence has grown—especially through affiliated bodies such as the BJP, VHP, and ABVP—demands for greater transparency have also increased.

For Priyank Kharge, the issue goes beyond the immediate controversy over a march. His broader argument is that organisations with significant social and political reach should not be allowed to operate outside the legal framework that governs other civil society bodies. “Transparency is the foundation of democracy,” he said. “If the RSS is truly a nationalist organisation that believes in the Constitution, then it should have no problem being accountable under the same laws as everyone else.”

What Lies Ahead

The next hearing in the Chittapur march case is expected to take place in early March 2026, following the court’s directive for dialogue between the RSS and Dalit groups. Meanwhile, Kharge’s remarks are likely to sharpen the political confrontation between the Congress government and right-wing groups in Karnataka.

For now, the questions he raised—about registration, legality, transparency, and security privileges—have opened up a larger national conversation about the nature of organisations like the RSS, their relationship with the state, and their role in public life. Whether these questions will lead to any legal or policy changes remains to be seen, but the debate underscores how the intersection of politics, law, and ideology continues to shape India’s democratic discourse.