Why Delhi court dismissed Enforcement Directorate complaint against Gandhis in National Herald case
Special judge Vishal Gogne said it is 'premature and imprudent' to decide the National Herald case against Gandhis and others based on submissions of the ED and proposed accused.
In a relief to Sonia Gandhi, Rahul Gandhi and others, a Delhi court Tuesday dismissed the Enforcement Directorate prosecution complaint (equivalent to a chargesheet) against senior Indian National Congress leaders Sonia Gandhi and Rahul Gandhi, who is the Leader of Opposition in Lok Sabha, in the National Herald case.
Special judge Vishal Gogne dismissed the prosecution complaint, saying it was “not maintainable” underlining the following.
An investigation and the consequent prosecution complaint pertaining to the offence of money laundering, defined under Section 3 and punishable under Section 4 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) is not maintainable in the absence of an FIR for the offence mentioned in the schedule to the Act.
Investigation pertaining to “the offence of money laundering is not maintainable” on the basis of a complaint under Section 200 Code of Criminal Procedure (now section 223 BNSS) and consequent order of cognisance as well as summoning when such complaint is filed by a public person. The provision mandates a pre-cognisance hearing for the accused before a magistrate takes cognisance of an offence, ensuring the accused gets a chance to be heard.
Prosecution complaint impermissible in law as it is founded on cognisance and summoning order upon a complaint under Section 200 CrPC filed by a public person — Dr Subramanian Swamy — and not based on an FIR.
Cognisance upon the present complaint being liable to be declined on a question of law, other arguments relating to the merits of the allegations are not required to be adjudicated.
It is premature and imprudent for the court to decide the matter based on the submissions made by the ED as well as the proposed accused in relation to the merits of the allegations.
Noting that the question of law had governed the order declining cognisance, the order stated, “The court is not required to address the merits of the allegations. Hence, the court is not inclined to address the other arguments advanced by the proposed accused persons, which pertain to mixed questions of law and fact or questions solely relatable to facts.”
Case
The case originated in 2012 from a criminal complaint filed by Swamy, the then BJP Rajya Sabha MP, against the Gandhis and other Congress functionaries, whom he accused of fraud in acquiring the property of Associated Journals Limited (AJL), the company which published the newspaper, National Herald.
Congress functionaries Suman Dubey and Sam Pitroda have also been named as accused in this case along with two firms- Young Indian and Dotex Merchandise Private Limited as an accused.
According to the ED, 99% of AJL’s shares were allegedly transferred to Young Indian for just Rs 50 lakh, even though the value of AJL’s properties exceeded Rs 2,000 crore.
The Gandhis hold shares of 38% each in Young Indian, a not-for-profit charitable company.
Story continues below this ad
Senior advocates Abhishek M Singhvi, R S Cheema, and advocate Tarannum Cheema, Sushil Bajaj and other lawyers represented the proposed accused persons.
Additional solicitor general S V Raju represented the ED.
Vineet Upadhyay is an Assistant Editor with The Indian Express, where he leads specialized coverage of the Indian judicial system.
Expertise
Specialized Legal Authority: Vineet has spent the better part of his career analyzing the intricacies of the law. His expertise lies in "demystifying" judgments from the Supreme Court of India, various High Courts, and District Courts. His reporting covers a vast spectrum of legal issues, including:
Constitutional & Civil Rights: Reporting on landmark rulings regarding privacy, equality, and state accountability.
Criminal Justice & Enforcement: Detailed coverage of high-profile cases involving the Enforcement Directorate (ED), NIA, and POCSO matters.
Consumer Rights & Environmental Law: Authoritative pieces on medical negligence compensation, environmental protection (such as the "living person" status of rivers), and labor rights.
Over a Decade of Professional Experience: Prior to joining The Indian Express, he served as a Principal Correspondent/Legal Reporter for The Times of India and held significant roles at The New Indian Express. His tenure has seen him report from critical legal hubs, including Delhi and Uttarakhand. ... Read More
