Delhi HC Issues Notice to Sonia and Rahul Gandhi on ED Plea in National Herald Case

New Delhi, Dec 22: The Delhi High Court on Monday issued notice to Congress Parliamentary Party Chairperson Sonia Gandhi, Leader of Opposition in the Lok Sabha Rahul Gandhi, and several others in connection with the Enforcement Directorate’s (ED) criminal revision petition in the alleged National Herald money laundering case. The move comes after the ED challenged a trial court order that had refused to take cognisance of its prosecution complaint filed under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA).

The notice was issued by a single-judge Bench of Justice Ravinder Dudeja, who heard the ED’s submissions and sought responses from all parties involved. The court has listed the matter for further hearing on March 12, 2026. Notice has also been issued on the ED’s stay application attached to the main petition.

The ED’s complaint relates to its investigation into alleged financial irregularities involving Associated Journals Ltd (AJL), the original publisher of the National Herald newspaper. The agency has accused senior Congress leaders of participating in a conspiracy to illegally acquire assets estimated at over Rs 2,000 crore through Young Indian Pvt Ltd, a company in which Sonia and Rahul Gandhi are majority shareholders.

The controversy first surfaced in 2012 after Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leader Subramanian Swamy filed a private complaint in a trial court, alleging cheating and breach of trust in the acquisition of AJL. The ED later launched a probe under the PMLA, naming Sonia Gandhi, Rahul Gandhi, and other Congress-linked individuals and entities as proposed accused.

Earlier this year, Special Judge (PC Act) Vishal Gogne of the Rouse Avenue Court had declined to take cognisance of the ED’s prosecution complaint, ruling that it was not legally maintainable. The trial court held that the complaint could not proceed in its existing form under the PMLA and granted relief to Sonia and Rahul Gandhi.

However, the court clarified that the ED was free to continue its investigation as permitted by law.

Apart from the Gandhis, the ED has also named Congress Overseas chief Sam Pitroda, journalist Suman Dubey, businessman Sunil Bhandari, Young Indian, and Dotex Merchandise Pvt Ltd as proposed accused in the case.

During Monday’s hearing in the Delhi High Court, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the ED, argued that the trial court’s decision, if upheld, would undermine the very purpose of the PMLA. He submitted that ruling out the ED’s ability to prosecute a case where a private complaint has been filed under Section 200 of the CrPC could render the law ineffective.

“This brings the PMLA on its head. It becomes otiose and redundant if this order is to sustain,” SG Mehta said, asserting that the trial court had committed a serious error. He further argued that such an interpretation could have wider implications, potentially affecting several other ongoing investigations under PMLA, and creating a scenario where only a police FIR could trigger action under the money laundering law.

The High Court, in response, sought clarification on whether the ED had previously acted in any case after a court took cognisance of a private complaint. Mehta replied that the PMLA does not specify a particular process for registering a money laundering offence, and that any credible allegation relating to criminal activity connected to a scheduled offence is sufficient to initiate proceedings.

With the court now examining the ED’s challenge, the high-profile case returns to the spotlight, reviving political and legal debate over the ownership and transfer of assets originally belonging to AJL. The outcome of the proceedings will be closely followed, given the stature of the accused and the scale of the alleged financial irregularities.

Team Maverick