<p>New Delhi: The Delhi High Court on Monday sought a response from Congress leaders Sonia Gandhi, Rahul Gandhi and others on a plea by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) challenging the trial court's order, which refused to take cognisance of its chargesheet against them in the National Herald case. </p><p>A single judge of Justice Ravinder Dudeja issued notice to the Gandhis and others on the main petition as well as on the ED's application seeking a stay on the December 16 trial court order, which held that cognisance of the agency's complaint in the case was "impermissible in law" as it was not founded on an FIR.</p>.Karnataka power tussle: Decision on leadership change should be made by Rahul Gandhi, says CM Siddaramaiah.<p>The high court posted the matter for further hearing on March 12, 2026.</p><p>The court's response was also sought from Suman Dubey, Sam Pitroda, Young Indian, Dotex Merchandise Pvt Ltd and Sunil Bhandari.</p><p>Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, for the ED, contended that the trial court with its view has gone “horribly wrong” and this would affect other cases also. </p><p>He said after investigation, the ED officials gather evidence and other material and, like the police files a report, the ED files a prosecution complaint.</p><p>The ED, in its plea, said the trial court order has in effect given a hall pass to a category of money launderers only on the ground that the scheduled offence is reported by a private individual by way of a complaint to a magistrate. </p><p>It claimed there are such grave allegations levelled against the Gandhis and others which cannot be brushed aside lightly by relying upon judicial precedents cited to conclude that the ingredients of the criminal offences alleged are lacking. </p><p>The ED said the trial court order suffers from the vice of judicial legislation which the special judge appears to be admittedly cognisant of.</p><p>The trial court said that despite receiving the complaint made by BJP leader Subramanian Swamy and the consequent summoning order in 2014, the CBI refrained from registering an FIR in relation to the alleged scheduled offence.</p><p>Senior advocates A M Singhvi and R S Cheema appeared for the respondents.</p><p>In the case, ECIR relating to money laundering was lodged on June 30, 2021.</p><p>The ED has accused Sonia and Rahul Gandhi, as well as late Congress leaders Motilal Vora and Oscar Fernandes, along with Suman Dubey, Sam Pitroda, and a private company, Young Indian, of conspiracy and money laundering.</p><p>It was alleged that they acquired properties worth approximately Rs 2,000 crore belonging to Associated Journals Limited (AJL), which publishes the National Herald newspaper.</p><p>The investigating agency further alleged that the Gandhis held the majority 76 per cent shares in Young Indian, which "fraudulently" usurped the assets of AJL in exchange for a Rs 90 crore loan.</p>
<p>New Delhi: The Delhi High Court on Monday sought a response from Congress leaders Sonia Gandhi, Rahul Gandhi and others on a plea by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) challenging the trial court's order, which refused to take cognisance of its chargesheet against them in the National Herald case. </p><p>A single judge of Justice Ravinder Dudeja issued notice to the Gandhis and others on the main petition as well as on the ED's application seeking a stay on the December 16 trial court order, which held that cognisance of the agency's complaint in the case was "impermissible in law" as it was not founded on an FIR.</p>.Karnataka power tussle: Decision on leadership change should be made by Rahul Gandhi, says CM Siddaramaiah.<p>The high court posted the matter for further hearing on March 12, 2026.</p><p>The court's response was also sought from Suman Dubey, Sam Pitroda, Young Indian, Dotex Merchandise Pvt Ltd and Sunil Bhandari.</p><p>Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, for the ED, contended that the trial court with its view has gone “horribly wrong” and this would affect other cases also. </p><p>He said after investigation, the ED officials gather evidence and other material and, like the police files a report, the ED files a prosecution complaint.</p><p>The ED, in its plea, said the trial court order has in effect given a hall pass to a category of money launderers only on the ground that the scheduled offence is reported by a private individual by way of a complaint to a magistrate. </p><p>It claimed there are such grave allegations levelled against the Gandhis and others which cannot be brushed aside lightly by relying upon judicial precedents cited to conclude that the ingredients of the criminal offences alleged are lacking. </p><p>The ED said the trial court order suffers from the vice of judicial legislation which the special judge appears to be admittedly cognisant of.</p><p>The trial court said that despite receiving the complaint made by BJP leader Subramanian Swamy and the consequent summoning order in 2014, the CBI refrained from registering an FIR in relation to the alleged scheduled offence.</p><p>Senior advocates A M Singhvi and R S Cheema appeared for the respondents.</p><p>In the case, ECIR relating to money laundering was lodged on June 30, 2021.</p><p>The ED has accused Sonia and Rahul Gandhi, as well as late Congress leaders Motilal Vora and Oscar Fernandes, along with Suman Dubey, Sam Pitroda, and a private company, Young Indian, of conspiracy and money laundering.</p><p>It was alleged that they acquired properties worth approximately Rs 2,000 crore belonging to Associated Journals Limited (AJL), which publishes the National Herald newspaper.</p><p>The investigating agency further alleged that the Gandhis held the majority 76 per cent shares in Young Indian, which "fraudulently" usurped the assets of AJL in exchange for a Rs 90 crore loan.</p>
