ED Moves HC Against Dismissal of Its Case Against Sonia, Rahul Gandhi
The Enforcement Directorate (ED) has escalated its legal battle in the National Herald case by filing a petition with the Delhi High Court, challenging a recent trial court order that dismissed its prosecution complaint against Congress leaders Sonia Gandhi and Rahul Gandhi, among others. The move comes after Special Judge Vishal Gogne of the Rouse Avenue Courts deemed the ED's complaint "impermissible in law" on December 16, 2025. The High Court is expected to list the criminal revision petition for hearing next week.
The ED's case revolves around alleged money laundering in the acquisition of Associated Journals Limited (AJL), publisher of the now-defunct National Herald newspaper. The agency has accused Sonia and Rahul Gandhi, along with other Congress functionaries, of conspiring to illegally acquire AJL's assets, valued at over ₹2,000 crore, through Young Indian Private Ltd (YIL), a company in which the Gandhis hold a majority stake.
The trial court's dismissal was based on the premise that the ED's case was not founded on a First Information Report (FIR) related to a scheduled offense under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA). Instead, the ED's proceedings stemmed from a private complaint filed by BJP leader Subramanian Swamy in 2014, which alleged cheating, criminal conspiracy, breach of trust, and misappropriation of property. The court noted that the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) had refrained from registering an FIR despite receiving Swamy's complaint.
The ED, in its appeal to the High Court, argues that the trial court overlooked critical evidence of money laundering and that its refusal to proceed with the prosecution has caused serious prejudice to the investigation. The agency contends that the trial court's narrow interpretation of the law undermines the PMLA's objectives. The ED had filed a fresh prosecution complaint against Rahul Gandhi and Sonia Gandhi under sections 44 and 45 of Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) 2002 for commission of offence of money laundering as defined under section 3 read with section 70 and punishable under section 4 of PMLA, 2002.
The National Herald case has been a subject of political and legal contention for several years. The controversy dates back to 2010, when YIL acquired AJL's debts from the Indian National Congress for ₹50 lakh, giving YIL control of AJL's assets. The ED initiated its investigation in 2014, focusing on the financial transactions between the Congress party, AJL, and YIL.
Senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, reacting to the trial court's ruling, had called it a "deserved victory," asserting that the case was the "strangest ever" with no actual movement of money or transfer of immovable property. However, the ED maintains that the acquisition of AJL's assets by YIL constitutes money laundering, as it involved the illegal transfer of properties worth over ₹2,000 crore.
The Delhi High Court's decision on the ED's appeal will have significant implications for the National Herald case and the legal proceedings against the Gandhis and other accused individuals. The case also raises important questions about the scope and interpretation of the PMLA and the role of private complaints in initiating money laundering investigations.
