Cognisance Or Closure? Delhi Court Set To Rule On ED Chargesheet In National Herald Case On Saturday

The political atmosphere in New Delhi is charged as the Rouse Avenue Court prepares to pronounce its crucial order on Saturday regarding whether to take cognisance of the Enforcement Directorate’s chargesheet in the National Herald money laundering case. The decision by Special Judge (PC Act) Vishal Gogne will mark a critical juncture in the high-profile case that arrays the top leadership of the Congress party as accused under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA).

The chargesheet, filed by the ED in April 2025, names Congress Parliamentary Party Chairperson Sonia Gandhi, Leader of Opposition (LoP) in the Lok Sabha Rahul Gandhi, Congress Overseas Chief Sam Pitroda, and former Congress treasurer Suman Dubey, among others, alongside the company

Young Indian (YI) and Dotex Merchandise Pvt Ltd. The court had previously reserved its order on November 7 after the ED submitted final clarifications, following an extensive inspection of the case records and repeated arguments over several months.

The Core Allegations

The case revolves around the financial transactions involving the defunct newspaper National Herald, originally published by Associated Journals Limited (AJL), a company founded by Jawaharlal Nehru and other freedom fighters. The ED alleges that AJL, which owned vast real estate assets estimated to be worth over Rs 2,000 crore, was fraudulently acquired by Young Indian (YI).

The prosecution’s claim centres on a Rs 90.25 crore interest-free loan extended by the All India Congress Committee (AICC) to AJL to clear its debt. The ED argues that this debt was then assigned to the newly incorporated YI for a nominal sum of just Rs 50 lakh. Crucially, Sonia Gandhi and Rahul Gandhi jointly held a 76% stake in the newly formed Young Indian, allegedly granting them beneficial control over the extensive properties owned by AJL, which were originally intended solely for newspaper publication.

The ED maintains that this entire transaction was a “sham” designed to usurp the assets of AJL, thereby constituting the “proceeds of crime” under the PMLA. They have sought penal action under Section 4 of the PMLA, which provides for a jail term of up to seven years.

Congress’s Defence

The Congress party has consistently and vehemently denied any wrongdoing, dismissing the case as an act of “political vendetta” orchestrated by the ruling BJP to harass and intimidate the opposition. They argue that Young Indian, incorporated as a not-for-profit company under Section 25 of the Companies Act, could not allow any individual to profit financially. Furthermore, their legal counsel has contested the very basis of the PMLA charges, arguing that this is a “strange and unprecedented prosecution” involving alleged money laundering without any actual proceeds of crime.

The court’s decision on cognisance is crucial. If the Special Judge decides to take cognisance, it implies that the court finds sufficient evidence to believe that a prima facie case exists against the accused, thereby paving the way for the formal trial process to commence. The ruling is expected to have significant political ramifications, further escalating the high-stakes legal battle between the country’s ruling establishment and the main opposition party.