Court Says Gandhis Not Entitled to FIR Copy in National Herald Case

New Delhi, Dec 2025 : A Delhi court on Tuesday ruled that Congress Parliamentary Party Chairperson Sonia Gandhi, Lok Sabha Leader of Opposition Rahul Gandhi, and several other accused are not entitled to receive a copy of the latest First Information Report (FIR) registered against them by the Delhi Police in connection with the National Herald case. The court, however, clarified that the accused may be informed about the registration of the FIR.

Special Judge (PC Act) Vishal Gogne of the Rouse Avenue Courts set aside an earlier order of a Magistrate court that had directed the police to provide a copy of the FIR to the accused. The ruling came on a petition filed by the Economic Offences Wing (EOW) of the Delhi Police, which had challenged the Magistrate’s directions.

The case relates to a fresh FIR registered on October 3 by the EOW, reviving a long-running controversy linked to the National Herald newspaper and its parent company, Associated Journals Limited (AJL). The dispute, which has remained in public and legal focus for over a decade, centres on allegations of financial irregularities and criminal conspiracy involving senior Congress leaders and associated entities.

The FIR names Sonia Gandhi, Rahul Gandhi, and six others, including Congress Overseas chief Sam Pitroda, Suman Dubey, and Sunil Bhandari. It also includes three entities—Young Indian, Dotex Merchandise Private Limited, and AJL—as accused. The FIR was registered following a complaint by the Enforcement Directorate (ED), which had been examining financial transactions and property dealings linked to AJL and related organisations.

According to the FIR, the accused allegedly conspired to “fraudulently take over” AJL, which owned properties reportedly valued at more than Rs 2,000 crore. The police allege that control over AJL was acquired for a nominal sum of Rs 50 lakh through Young Indian, a company in which Sonia and Rahul Gandhi are majority stakeholders.

Court records show that on October 4, the Delhi Police filed a copy of the FIR before the court of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate (ACJM). On October 6, the ACJM directed the police to inform the accused about the FIR and to supply them with a copy. The Delhi Police challenged this order on October 8, arguing that it was contrary to established legal principles and Supreme Court rulings. On the same day, Special Judge Vishal Gogne stayed the Magistrate’s directions.

While delivering Tuesday’s order, the Special Judge accepted the police’s contention that the accused were not automatically entitled to a copy of the FIR, particularly as none of them had formally applied for it at that stage. The court ruled that while the accused could be informed of the FIR’s registration, supplying a copy was not mandatory under the circumstances.

The investigation has since widened, with the EOW issuing a notice on December 5 to Karnataka Deputy Chief Minister D.K. Shivakumar in connection with the same case. According to officials, Shivakumar is believed to possess information relevant to the financial transactions under scrutiny.

The notice seeks detailed financial records, including the nature and bifurcation of funds allegedly given to Young Indian by Shivakumar, his associated companies, firms, and trusts. Investigators are examining claims that Shivakumar and his brother, D.K. Suresh, personally donated Rs 2.5 crore to Young Indian, while another Rs 2.5 crore was allegedly contributed through trusts linked to Shivakumar.

The Shivakumar brothers had earlier been questioned by the ED in relation to these transactions. In the latest development, the Delhi Police have asked Shivakumar to provide the requested information and appear for inquiry on or before December 19.

The Congress party has strongly criticised the developments, accusing the BJP-led central government of misusing investigative agencies to target opposition leaders. Senior Congress leaders have described the case as politically motivated and aimed at intimidating and harassing the party’s leadership. They have consistently maintained that Young Indian is a not-for-profit company and that no personal financial gain was derived from the transactions in question.

The BJP, on the other hand, has rejected these allegations, stating that the investigation is a lawful process based on evidence and that no individual is above the law.

Earlier in the day, in a related development, the same court delivered significant relief to Sonia Gandhi, Rahul Gandhi, and other proposed accused by refusing to take cognisance of the ED’s prosecution complaint in the alleged National Herald money laundering case. Special Judge Vishal Gogne held that the complaint filed under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) was not maintainable, though he clarified that the ED was free to continue its investigation in accordance with the law.

Together, the twin court developments have added new dimensions to the long-running National Herald case, which continues to carry major legal and political implications.

Team Maverick.