Senior advocate R.S. Cheema, representing Rahul Gandhi, argued in court on Saturday that the All India Congress Committee (AICC) was not attempting to sell the assets of Associated Journals Limited (AJL), but rather trying to save the institution, which was a part of the freedom movement. Cheema made the submissions before Special Judge Vishal Gogne, who is hearing arguments on the chargesheet filed against Sonia Gandhi, Rahul Gandhi, and others in the National Herald money laundering case.
The Enforcement Directorate (ED) has accused Sonia and Rahul Gandhi, along with other Congress leaders, of conspiracy and money laundering over the alleged fraudulent takeover of properties valued at over ₹2,000 crore belonging to Associated Journals Limited (AJL), which published the National Herald newspaper. The ED alleges that the Gandhis held a majority 76 percent share in Young Indian, which fraudulently usurped the assets of AJL in exchange for a ₹90 crore loan.
Cheema began his rebuttal by questioning why the ED counsel was hesitant to present the Memorandum of Association (MoA) of AJL. He highlighted that AJL was established in 1937 by Jawaharlal Nehru, J. B. Kripalani, Rafi Ahmed Kidwai, and others. Cheema emphasized that the AJL MoA stated that the policy of AJL would align with the policy of the Indian National Congress (INC). He further added that AJL never operated as a commercial institution and the AICC was trying to revive an institution that was part of the freedom movement heritage. According to Cheema, the aim was not to recover the loan given to AJL, but to revitalize the institution and ensure its revival. He asserted that the AICC was not seeking profit from sales.
Cheema also addressed the ED's allegations against the AICC, stating that the ED had not acknowledged the AICC's large membership. He refuted the allegation that AJL ceased publishing the newspaper in 2008 and instead began operating as a real estate company. Cheema argued that the ED made "unwarranted inferences" against Rahul Gandhi by incorrectly assuming he was in charge of AICC's affairs as its general secretary in 2010, pointing out that the AICC has multiple general secretaries and no single individual is solely in charge. He also stated that Sonia Gandhi, then Congress president, was wrongly inferred as person in-charge of AICC when the loan was assigned to AJL.
The case was initiated by BJP leader Subramanian Swamy, who alleged criminal conspiracy by several prominent politicians, including Sonia Gandhi and Rahul Gandhi. The ED has filed its chargesheet against the Gandhis and others under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA).
Additional Solicitor General S. V. Raju, representing the ED, argued that a conspiracy was hatched to form Young Indian Private Limited, in which the Gandhis held 76% shares, to usurp the assets of AJL, which took a ₹90 crore loan from the AICC despite having assets worth crores. Raju said that Sonia and Rahul Gandhi wanted to take over this ₹2,000 crore company. He further added that AJL was not making profits but had assets worth ₹2,000 crore.
Senior Advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi had previously concluded his arguments on behalf of Sonia Gandhi. The arguments will continue against other accused, including Suman Dubey, Sam Pitroda, Sunil Bhandari, Young Indian and Dotex Merchandise Pvt Ltd.
