<p>New Delhi: Senior advocate R S Cheema, representing Congress leader Rahul Gandhi, on Saturday argued that the AICC was not trying to sell the assets of Associated Journals Limited (AJL), but rather attempting to save the institution, which was part of the freedom movement.</p>.<p>Cheema began his rebuttal before Special Judge Vishal Gogne.</p>.<p>The Enforcement Directorate (ED) has accused Sonia and Rahul Gandhi, late Congress leaders Motilal Vora and Oscar Fernandes, as well as Suman Dubey, Sam Pitroda, and a private company, Young Indian, of conspiracy and money laundering over the fraudulent takeover of properties valued at over ₹2,000 crore belonging to Associated Journals Limited (AJL), which published the National Herald newspaper.</p>.Money laundering case sans any property or projection of it: Sonia Gandhi argues in National Herald case.<p>"Can my friend (ED counsel) tell me why they were shy of placing the Memorandum of Association (MoA) of AJL? AJL was established in 1937 by Jawaharlal Nehru, J. B. Kripalani, Rafi Ahmed Kidwai, and others."</p>.<p>"The AJL MoA said that the policy of AJL will be the policy of the INC. All through, AJL did not have profits. In the post-independence period, it was never a commercial institution. We (All India Congress Committee) were trying to retrieve an institution which is part of the freedom movement heritage. The problem was not recovering the loan (given to AJL); the problem was to revive it, to see that it comes back on the rails. AICC was not looking for profit from sales. This is a squinted version," Cheema said.</p>.<p>The ED alleges the Gandhis held a majority 76 percent share in Young Indian, which fraudulently usurped the assets of AJL in exchange for a Rs 90 crore loan.</p>.<p>Earlier, on Friday, senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi concluded his arguments on behalf of Sonia Gandhi.</p>.<p>On July 3, Raju argued on the point of the chargesheet's cognisance, saying the Gandhis were the "beneficial owners" of Young Indian and acquired total control after the death of other shareholders.</p>.<p>The ED filed its chargesheet against the Gandhis and others under Sections 3 (money laundering) and 4 (punishment for money laundering) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA).</p>.<p>The chargesheet also names Dubey, Pitroda, Sunil Bhandari, Young Indian, and Dotex Merchandise Private Limited. </p>
<p>New Delhi: Senior advocate R S Cheema, representing Congress leader Rahul Gandhi, on Saturday argued that the AICC was not trying to sell the assets of Associated Journals Limited (AJL), but rather attempting to save the institution, which was part of the freedom movement.</p>.<p>Cheema began his rebuttal before Special Judge Vishal Gogne.</p>.<p>The Enforcement Directorate (ED) has accused Sonia and Rahul Gandhi, late Congress leaders Motilal Vora and Oscar Fernandes, as well as Suman Dubey, Sam Pitroda, and a private company, Young Indian, of conspiracy and money laundering over the fraudulent takeover of properties valued at over ₹2,000 crore belonging to Associated Journals Limited (AJL), which published the National Herald newspaper.</p>.Money laundering case sans any property or projection of it: Sonia Gandhi argues in National Herald case.<p>"Can my friend (ED counsel) tell me why they were shy of placing the Memorandum of Association (MoA) of AJL? AJL was established in 1937 by Jawaharlal Nehru, J. B. Kripalani, Rafi Ahmed Kidwai, and others."</p>.<p>"The AJL MoA said that the policy of AJL will be the policy of the INC. All through, AJL did not have profits. In the post-independence period, it was never a commercial institution. We (All India Congress Committee) were trying to retrieve an institution which is part of the freedom movement heritage. The problem was not recovering the loan (given to AJL); the problem was to revive it, to see that it comes back on the rails. AICC was not looking for profit from sales. This is a squinted version," Cheema said.</p>.<p>The ED alleges the Gandhis held a majority 76 percent share in Young Indian, which fraudulently usurped the assets of AJL in exchange for a Rs 90 crore loan.</p>.<p>Earlier, on Friday, senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi concluded his arguments on behalf of Sonia Gandhi.</p>.<p>On July 3, Raju argued on the point of the chargesheet's cognisance, saying the Gandhis were the "beneficial owners" of Young Indian and acquired total control after the death of other shareholders.</p>.<p>The ED filed its chargesheet against the Gandhis and others under Sections 3 (money laundering) and 4 (punishment for money laundering) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA).</p>.<p>The chargesheet also names Dubey, Pitroda, Sunil Bhandari, Young Indian, and Dotex Merchandise Private Limited. </p>