National Herald case: Delhi HC grants Sonia, Rahul 3 weeks to respond to ED plea
Advertisement
New Delhi, July 27 : The Delhi High Court on Monday granted Congress Parliamentary Party Chairperson Sonia Gandhi, Leader of Opposition in the Lok Sabha Rahul Gandhi and other respondents three weeks to file their replies on the Enforcement Directorate's (ED) criminal revision petition challenging a trial court order refusing to take cognisance of its prosecution complaint in the alleged National Herald money laundering case.
A single-judge Bench of Justice Manoj Jain granted time to the respondents to place their replies on record and listed the matter for further hearing on September 10.
Apart from Sonia Gandhi and Rahul Gandhi, the ED has arrayed Congress Overseas chief Sam Pitroda, Suman Dubey, Sunil Bhandari, Young Indian and Dotex Merchandise Private Limited as proposed accused in the case.
The ED has challenged the December 16, 2025 order of the Rouse Avenue Court, which had declined to take cognisance of its prosecution complaint under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), holding that it was not maintainable in law.
The federal anti-money laundering agency has contended that the trial court committed an error in holding that a prosecution complaint under the PMLA cannot be founded on a scheduled offence arising from a private complaint.
According to the ED, the cognisance taken by a competent court on a private complaint stands on a higher footing than an FIR registered by the police, and criminal law can be set in motion either through a police investigation or by way of a private complaint before a Magistrate.
Earlier, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the ED, had argued that if the trial court's interpretation is allowed to stand, it would render the PMLA "otiose and redundant".
The Centre’s law officer had submitted that the PMLA does not prescribe any specific mode for registration of a money laundering offence and only requires an allegation of criminal activity connected to a scheduled offence.
Earlier, after hearing the ED, the Delhi High Court had observed that the matter required consideration and issued notice to Sonia Gandhi, Rahul Gandhi and the other respondents on the revision petition.
The high-profile case relates to allegations that senior Congress leaders conspired to illegally acquire control over assets worth more than Rs 2,000 crore belonging to Associated Journals Ltd (AJL), the original publisher of the National Herald newspaper, by paying a nominal sum of Rs 50 lakh through Young Indian, a company in which Sonia Gandhi and Rahul Gandhi are majority shareholders.
The controversy over the National Herald's assets dates back to 2012, when BJP leader Subramanian Swamy filed a private complaint before a trial court alleging cheating and breach of trust in the acquisition of AJL by Young Indian.
A single-judge Bench of Justice Manoj Jain granted time to the respondents to place their replies on record and listed the matter for further hearing on September 10.
Apart from Sonia Gandhi and Rahul Gandhi, the ED has arrayed Congress Overseas chief Sam Pitroda, Suman Dubey, Sunil Bhandari, Young Indian and Dotex Merchandise Private Limited as proposed accused in the case.
The ED has challenged the December 16, 2025 order of the Rouse Avenue Court, which had declined to take cognisance of its prosecution complaint under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), holding that it was not maintainable in law.
The federal anti-money laundering agency has contended that the trial court committed an error in holding that a prosecution complaint under the PMLA cannot be founded on a scheduled offence arising from a private complaint.
According to the ED, the cognisance taken by a competent court on a private complaint stands on a higher footing than an FIR registered by the police, and criminal law can be set in motion either through a police investigation or by way of a private complaint before a Magistrate.
Earlier, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the ED, had argued that if the trial court's interpretation is allowed to stand, it would render the PMLA "otiose and redundant".
The Centre’s law officer had submitted that the PMLA does not prescribe any specific mode for registration of a money laundering offence and only requires an allegation of criminal activity connected to a scheduled offence.
Earlier, after hearing the ED, the Delhi High Court had observed that the matter required consideration and issued notice to Sonia Gandhi, Rahul Gandhi and the other respondents on the revision petition.
The high-profile case relates to allegations that senior Congress leaders conspired to illegally acquire control over assets worth more than Rs 2,000 crore belonging to Associated Journals Ltd (AJL), the original publisher of the National Herald newspaper, by paying a nominal sum of Rs 50 lakh through Young Indian, a company in which Sonia Gandhi and Rahul Gandhi are majority shareholders.
The controversy over the National Herald's assets dates back to 2012, when BJP leader Subramanian Swamy filed a private complaint before a trial court alleging cheating and breach of trust in the acquisition of AJL by Young Indian.
Advertisement
Note: The content of this article is sourced from a news agency and has not been edited by the ap7am team.