Delhi HC Issues Notice to Sonia, Rahul Gandhi on ED Plea in National Herald Case
In a significant development, the Delhi High Court has issued a notice to Congress leaders Sonia Gandhi and Rahul Gandhi in response to a plea filed by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) challenging a trial court's decision to refuse cognisance of the agency's money laundering complaint in the National Herald case. The high court's move has sent shockwaves through the political landscape, with the Congress party scrambling to defend its top leaders.
On Monday, Justice Ravinder Dudeja of the Delhi High Court heard the ED's revision petition, which challenged the trial court's December 16 decision to refuse cognisance of the agency's prosecution complaint against the Gandhis. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the ED, argued that the trial court erred in holding that proceedings under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) cannot be maintained in the absence of an FIR for the scheduled offence.
The ED's case revolves around the acquisition of Associated Journals Limited (AJL), the publisher of the now-defunct National Herald newspaper. In 2010, a newly formed company called Young Indian Pvt Ltd (YIL) acquired AJL's debts from the Indian National Congress for a paltry ₹50 lakh. Subsequently, YIL took control of AJL's assets, which were valued at over ₹2,000 crore. Sonia Gandhi and Rahul Gandhi held majority stakes in YIL, leading to allegations that they used party funds to gain control of AJL's valuable properties.
The ED alleged in its chargesheet filed in April that Sonia Gandhi and Rahul Gandhi illegally obtained the underlying assets of AJL and acquired crores as direct proceeds of crime. The ED's charges against the Gandhis fall under sections 3 and 4 of the PMLA, which deal with money laundering and its punishment, and section 70, which covers offences by companies. These charges attract a maximum imprisonment of seven years if proved.
The trial court's decision to refuse cognisance of the ED's complaint was based on the grounds that the prosecution complaint was not founded on an FIR relating to a scheduled offence under the PMLA. However, the trial court clarified that it was not examining the merits of the allegations and permitted further investigation following a subsequent FIR registered by the Economic Offences Wing (EOW), Delhi.
The ED's challenge to the trial court's decision has significant implications for the PMLA framework. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta argued that if the trial court's order is allowed to stand, it would "affect several cases" and render the PMLA "otiose and redundant". He contended that the criminal complaint stands on a higher footing than an FIR and that cognisance can be taken by a court based on a private complaint after examining the complainant and witnesses.
Senior Advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, representing the Gandhi family, stated that some respondents had yet to be served with notices. However, the defense has not publicly detailed its full arguments in the available reports, though the representation indicates the Gandhis are contesting the ED's position.
The Delhi High Court's notice to Sonia and Rahul Gandhi has sent shockwaves through the Congress party, with the party scrambling to defend its top leaders. The ED's appeal has significant implications for the National Herald case, which has been mired in controversy for years. The case revolves around allegations of money laundering and misuse of party funds, with the Gandhis at the centre of the storm.
As the matter is scheduled to be heard again on March 12, 2026, the Congress party is bracing itself for a tough battle ahead. The Delhi High Court's decision to issue a notice to the Gandhis is a significant development that could potentially turn the tables in the ED's favour. With the stakes high and the implications far-reaching, the National Herald case is set to continue its tortuous journey through the courts, with the ED and the Gandhis locked in a battle for justice and vindication.
📰 Source: Hindustan Times - States
