Karnataka Home Minister Priyank Kharge has written to Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) chief Mohan Bhagwat seeking details on the organisation's legal status, finances, office-bearers, funding, and compliance with statutory requirements, reviving a long-running debate over the Sangh’s structure and transparency.
In his letter dated June 13, Priyank questioned how an organisation with the RSS’s scale of operations functions without being registered as a society, trust, or company, and argued that it should be subject to the same standards of disclosure expected from other public organisations.
"An organisation that claims over 60,000 shakhas and crores of swayamsevaks must also uphold transparency and constitutional accountability," Priyank wrote in a social media post on Monday, June 15.
The Minister asked the RSS to place in the public domain details relating to its legal status, organisational structure, office-bearers, sources of donations and income, expenditure, assets, tax compliance, and the legal basis on which it operates without formal registration.
"No organisation, however old, large or influential, can remain above scrutiny," Priyank said, adding that charitable bodies, trusts, NGOs, companies and religious institutions are routinely required to disclose their finances and organisational structures.
RSS chief Mohan Bhagwat has repeatedly defended the organisation’s structure, maintaining that it is not registered because it functions as a “body of individuals” and not as a society, trust, or company. He has argued that the RSS, founded in 1925 during British rule, was formed at a time when registration was not required, and that no law after Independence made such registration mandatory.
Bhagwat has also said that courts and the Income Tax Department have examined the matter in the past and that the RSS operates within the framework of the law. According to him, the organisation is treated as a “body of individuals” for legal purposes and therefore does not pay income tax as an organisation.
In his letter, Priyank cited figures from the RSS' 2025-26 report released by the Akhil Bharatiya Pratinidhi Sabha (ABPS), the organisation's highest decision-making body, to highlight the scale of its operations. According to the report, the RSS has 4,127 daily shakhas, 1,389 weekly milans, and 60 monthly mandalis in Karnataka.
In RSS terminology, shakhas refer to its regular local gatherings where swayamsevaks participate in physical exercises, discussions, and ideological training. Milans are periodic gatherings generally held where daily shakhas are not conducted, while mandalis refer to monthly meetings or assemblies of swayamsevaks.
The report also claims that the organisation held 2,194 Samajotsavas (community events) involving over 19.6 lakh participants and 562 route marches with more than 2.2 lakh uniformed participants in the state.
Priyank argued that such a large organisational presence, involving regular public mobilisation and large gatherings, raises legitimate questions regarding accountability, funding sources, taxation, and permissions obtained for public events.
The minister’s letter is the latest in a series of questions he has raised over the RSS’s legal and financial structure. In 2025, he had sought restrictions on RSS activities on government premises and later called for action against government employees participating in RSS events.
The RSS' legal status has been the subject of debate for decades. Political observers have argued that while the organisation exercises significant social and political influence, it is not subject to many of the disclosure requirements that apply to registered entities.
Investigations and academic studies on the RSS have noted that the organisation itself is not registered as a society or trust. Instead, many of its activities, properties and institutions are operated through a network of affiliated organisations, trusts, educational institutions, charities, and service bodies that are separately registered under various laws.
A detailed investigation by The Caravan magazine, titled Unveiling the RSS, argued that the Sangh's structure allows it to maintain a degree of organisational opacity because there is no central legal entity required to publish audited accounts, membership records, or annual disclosures comparable to those mandated for companies, societies, or charitable trusts. The report also highlighted how the RSS historically described itself differently in various contexts, including as a cultural organisation, social movement, and body of individuals, while relying on affiliated entities to own property, manage funds, and run institutions.
Supporters of the RSS, however, have maintained that the organisation's activities are lawful and that its affiliated bodies comply with applicable regulations.
Responding earlier to questions about the Karnataka government’s actions against RSS activities on government premises, Bhagwat had dismissed them as politically motivated attempts to hamper the Sangh’s work and create doubts among people.
Speaking at an event in Kerala, Bhagwat said the RSS was not a secretive organisation and that its activities took place openly. He said its shakhas were conducted in public grounds, its karyakartas worked openly in localities, and its programmes were visible to everyone.
He argued that there are numerous unregistered bodies in India and said registration is required only in specific circumstances, such as for entities seeking government funding. He also said that “Hindu Dharma itself is not registered.”
Bhagwat said the Union government had always been aware of the RSS’s existence, pointing out that the organisation had been banned twice and that both bans were later lifted. He said this demonstrated that the government recognised the organisation.
He further said the RSS had submitted its written constitution to the government in the 1950s and that no authority had ever directed it to register in the organisation’s 100-year history.
In his letter, Priyank urged the RSS to treat its centenary year as an opportunity for “constitutional introspection” and voluntarily disclose its finances, activities, and organisational details.
"The RSS cannot ask ordinary Indians to follow rules while exempting itself from the same standards," he wrote, adding that transparency and accountability should accompany the organisation's influence and public reach.