Delhi HC Issues Notice to Sonia and Rahul: What's Next for the National Herald Case?
Synopsis
Key Takeaways
- The Delhi High Court has issued a notice to Sonia and Rahul Gandhi.
- The Enforcement Directorate has challenged a trial court's decision regarding the National Herald case.
- Legal implications could affect ongoing investigations into money laundering.
- The case involves assets worth over Rs 2,000 crore.
- The next hearing is set for March 12, 2026.
New Delhi, Dec 22 (NationPress) The Delhi High Court on Monday issued a notice to Congress Parliamentary Party Chairperson Sonia Gandhi, Leader of Opposition in the Lok Sabha Rahul Gandhi, and others concerning a criminal revision petition filed by the Enforcement Directorate (ED). This petition challenges a trial court's decision that did not take cognizance of its money laundering complaint related to the alleged National Herald case.
After hearing the ED, a single-judge Bench led by Justice Ravinder Dudeja sought responses from the Gandhis and issued a notice regarding both the main plea and the stay application.
Justice Dudeja has scheduled the ED's plea, which contests the Rouse Avenue Court's dismissal of its prosecution complaint under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), for further hearing on March 12, 2026.
Previously, Special Judge (PC Act) Vishal Gogne of the Rouse Avenue Court had refused to acknowledge the ED's complaint, stating it was not legally maintainable.
While providing relief to Sonia and Rahul Gandhi, the trial court clarified that the ED could continue its investigation in accordance with the law.
In addition to the Gandhis, the ED has included Congress Overseas chief Sam Pitroda, Suman Dubey, Sunil Bhandari, Young Indian, and Dotex Merchandise Private Limited as proposed accused in the case.
During the proceedings, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the ED, argued before the Delhi High Court that allowing the trial court's order to remain would undermine the PMLA. “This effectively renders the PMLA ineffective. If this ruling stands, it becomes meaningless,” SG Mehta stated.
The Centre's second-highest law officer contended that the trial court made a significant error by asserting that the ED could not act when a court has acknowledged a private complaint under Section 200 of the CrPC.
He further argued that such an interpretation could impact numerous other cases, suggesting that only a police FIR could initiate proceedings under the PMLA.
During the hearing, the Delhi High Court inquired if there were any pending cases in which the ED had acted following a court's acknowledgment of a private complaint. In response, SG Mehta clarified that the PMLA does not specify a particular method for registering a money laundering offence, emphasizing that an allegation of criminal activity linked to a scheduled offence suffices.
This high-profile case revolves around allegations that prominent Congress leaders conspired to unlawfully acquire control over assets exceeding Rs 2,000 crore belonging to Associated Journals Ltd (AJL), the original publisher of the National Herald newspaper, by transferring a nominal sum of Rs 50 lakh through Young Indian, a company where Sonia and Rahul Gandhi hold majority shares.
The controversy about the National Herald's assets first gained attention in 2012 when BJP leader Subramanian Swamy filed a private complaint in a trial court, alleging that Congress leaders had participated in cheating and breach of trust during the acquisition of AJL.