National Herald case: Relief for Gandhis as court refuses to take cognisance of ED complaint; Truth prevailed, says Congress

NEW DELHI: In a relief to Congress leaders Sonia Gandhi, Rahul Gandhi and five others, a Delhi court on Tuesday refused to take cognisance of the Enforcement Directorate's money laundering charge against them in the National Herald case, holding that the agency's probe stemmed from a private complaint and not an FIR.

Delivering his order in a case that was marked by political slugfest and legal battles for several years, Special Judge Vishal Gogne said the cognisance of the ED's prosecution complaint relating to the offence of money laundering was "impermissible in law.”

The ED complaint was based on an investigation into a complaint by private person Subramanian Swamy and not on an FIR of a predicate offence, the judge said.

The court said it has now become premature and imprudent for it to decide the submissions made by the ED as well as the proposed accused in relation to the merits of the allegations, especially so when cognisance is liable to be declined on a “pure question of law”.

“Other arguments possibly live to fight another day."

ED officials said the probe agency may file an appeal against the court's order after taking opinion from law officers, including Solicitor General Tushar Mehta.

With court proceedings not moving to the trial stage for now, the officials said the agency will file a fresh chargesheet against Sonia and Rahul Gandhi apart from others as it has taken cognisance of the latest Delhi Police FIR filed in the National Herald money laundering case on October 3 this year.

The ED has accused Congress leaders Sonia and Rahul Gandhi, as well as late party leaders Motilal Vora and Oscar Fernandes, along with Suman Dubey, Sam Pitroda, and a private company, Young Indian, of conspiracy and money laundering.

It has been alleged that they acquired properties worth approximately Rs 2,000 crore belonging to Associated Journals Limited (AJL), which publishes the National Herald newspaper.

Reacting to the order, the Congress claimed that the "illegality" of the Narendra Modi government and its "politically motivated prosecution stands fully exposed".

In a statement, the Congress said the ED's proceedings against Congress leadership -- Sonia Gandhi and Rahul Gandhi -- in the case have been found to be "completely illegal and mala fide" by the court.

"Truth has prevailed, and truth will always prevail," Congress spokesperson Pawan Khera and Mohammed Khan told a joint press conference.

The BJP said no cognizance is not a clean chit to Sonia and Rahul Gandhi.

In a post on X, BJP national spokesperson Gaurav Bhatia said the primary criminal case, which originated from the private complaint filed by Subramanian Swamy alleging cheating, criminal conspiracy, and breach of trust, the predicate offense, is still pending trial in the Delhi Court.

"Bail Granted, Not Acquitted: Sonia and Rahul Gandhi were summoned in that original case and are out on bail. The court has not acquitted them in this case."

In a related development, the court set aside a magisterial court's order directing the Delhi Police to provide a copy of an FIR registered by them against Sonia and Rahul Gandhi in the National Herald case.

Reading out the operative part from the 117-page order on cognisance of the ED's complaint, judge Gogne said the Delhi Police's Economic Offences Wing has already lodged an FIR in the case, and hence, it will be premature to adjudicate on ED's arguments in the case based on merits.

"An investigation and the consequent prosecution complaint pertaining to the offence of money laundering defined under Section 3 of the PMLA and punishable under Section 4 is not maintainable in the absence of an FIR or offence mentioned in the schedule to the Act."

While section 3 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) deals with the offence of money laundering, section 4 pertains to punishment for the offence of money laundering.

"Cognisance of the offence under section 3 and punishable under section 4 is declined. The complaint is dismissed," the court said.

A statement released by the Congress asserted that the party and its leadership were committed to fighting for the truth and for the rights of every Indian. "We cannot, and will not ever be intimidated, because we fight for the truth."

Karnataka Chief Minister Siddaramaiah said the court order has completely exposed the "illegality" and "malafide intent" of the Modi government at the Centre.

Deputy CM D K Shivakumar said the Modi government's alleged misuse of power and malafide intent have now been exposed before the nation. "Truth and justice prevail."

The ED has further alleged that the Gandhis held the majority 76 per cent shares in Young Indian, which "fraudulently" usurped the assets of AJL in exchange for a Rs 90 crore loan.

The court also heard a separate plea filed by the Delhi Police which challenged the magisterial court's order arguing that Rahul Gandhi, Sonia Gandhi and others mentioned in the case are not entitled to a copy of the FIR.

The judge, however, said the accused may be informed that the FIR has been registered.

On October 3, Delhi Police filed an FIR against Sonia and Rahul Gandhi and other accused in the National Herald case on a complaint by the ED as part of the federal probe agency's money laundering probe into charges that the Gandhis allegedly "abused" their position for personal gains.

The police has mentioned criminal conspiracy, dishonest misappropriation of property, criminal breach of trust and cheating charges in the FIR that names the Gandhis, Congress leaders Suman Dubey and Sam Pitroda, entities like the Young Indian and Dotex Merchandise Ltd, Dotex promoter Sunil Bhandari, AJL, and unknown others.

These entities, except unknown others, are also named as accused in the ED chargesheet filed before a Delhi court in April.

The ED used powers available to it under Section 66(2) of the PMLA to get the police FIR registered.

This section allows the federal agency to share evidence for registration of a criminal predicate offence by a law enforcement agency so that it can subsequently book a money laundering case to take forward the investigation.