Delhi court reserves verdict in National Herald case
The high-profile case lists Congress Parliamentary Party Chairperson Sonia Gandhi, Leader of Opposition (LoP) in the Lok Sabha Rahul Gandhi, Congress Overseas Chief Sam Pitroda, Suman Dubey, and others as accused under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA).
After hearing the arguments of the Central agency as well as the proposed accused, including the Gandhis, Special Judge (PC Act) Vishal Gogne of the Rouse Avenue Courts listed the matter for pronouncing the order on July 29.
During the hearing, Additional Solicitor General (ASG) S.V. Raju, representing the ED, claimed that Young Indian Ltd -- in which Sonia and Rahul Gandhi are majority stakeholders – was used for usurping around Rs 2,000 crore assets of the National Herald by paying a nominal price of Rs 50 lakh.
ASG Raju said that Young Indian exists just in name, and all the other accused are puppets of the Gandhi family.
As per the ED, a conspiracy was hatched to form Young Indian to acquire control over the vast assets of the now-defunct newspaper, aimed at benefiting the top Congress leadership personally.
The probe agency said that several senior Congress leaders were involved in "fake transactions' made to Associated Journals Limited (AJL), the original publisher of the National Herald.
ASG Raju told the court that individuals were making fraudulent advance rent payments over several years at the direction of senior Congress functionaries with fabricated rent receipts.
The ED's prosecution complaint claimed that by way of a malicious takeover, the Congress leadership had misappropriated property belonging to the AJL and converted public trusts into personal assets.
On the other hand, senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, representing Sonia Gandhi, had described the money laundering allegations as 'really strange' and 'unprecedented', claiming that no tangible assets were involved.
Further, Rahul Gandhi claimed that the All India Congress Committee's attempts to revive the pre-Independence era newspaper were misconstrued as a bid to sell its assets.
Highlighting the non-profit objectives of the company, senior advocate R.S. Cheema, representing Rahul Gandhi, said the National Herald was never a commercial institution and the AICC just wanted to bring the newspaper back on the rails.
The controversy over the National Herald's assets came into focus in 2012 when BJP leader Subramanian Swamy filed a complaint in a trial court, alleging that Congress leaders had engaged in cheating and breach of trust in the process of acquiring AJL.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hindustan Times
6 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
Over 20 states sue Trump over $6.8 billion frozen funds for after-school, summer programmes
More than 20 states have sued US President Donald Trump over the freezing of about $6.8 billion in funding for after-school, summer programmes and other programmes. The states have argued that the Donald Trump administration has violated the US Constitution by not considering Congress's sole authority over spending. (Bloomberg) Attorney generals or governors from 24 states and the District of Columbia sued the Trump administration in federal court in Providence, Rhode Island. They argued that the US department of education and the office of management (OMB) and Budget brought chaos to schools across America by freezing funding for six programmes approved by Congress. North Carolina Attorney General Jeff Jackson told ABC News, "This is plainly against the law." He went on to explain from a legal standpoint that this is "against the Constitution, against the Impoundment Act. This is not a hard case". According to the Impoundment Control Act, 1947, Congress must note and review the executive branch withholdings of budget authority. This requires the President to report any such withholdings to Congress. ALSO READ | 20 US states sue Trump administration over sharing of medical aid data with deportation officials While the Trump administration has been going after Ivy League universities head-on, freezing millions and billions of dollars in funding, the freeze also extended to the money used to support migrant farm workers and their childrens' education, recruitment and training of teachers, English proficiency learning and academic enrichment, besides the after-school and summer programmes. The lawsuit filed against Trump said that his administration was legally required to release the funds to the states by July 1, Reuters reported. Instead, the education department notified them on June 30 that the funds would not be released under those programmes as per the deadline, citing the change in administration as its reason. At the time, an OMB spokesperson reportedly said, "ongoing programmatic review" of education funding and said initial findings showed what he termed as a misuse of grant funds to "subsidize a radical leftwing agenda." The department also raised objections to the grant money being used to support scholarship for immigrant students and LGBTQ-themed lessons. The Democratic-led states said that the freeze has resulted in cancellations of summer school and after-school programmes and the halting of other initiatives, with little time for schools to fill in the gaps in their budget. ALSO READ | Trump administration sues California over transgender athletes in schools The states have argued that the Trump administration has violated the US Constitution by not considering Congress's sole authority over spending and went against the federal administrative law by freezing funds without any logical explanation. They also said that the administration failed to abide by the Impoundment Control Act, which prevents the executive branch from single-handedly refusing to spend funds approved by Congress unless certain procedures are followed. Jackson further told ABC News, "If the courts don't act promptly, the consequences will be dire." He warned that districts face the threat of immediate harm as the school year is nearing. The North Carolina Attorney General said that the massive effect of the pause could also result in the firing of about 1,000 educators in the district. "Everybody knows when it comes to juvenile crime, you want a safe place for teenagers to be able to go, to be able to keep them out of trouble," Jackson said, adding that elimination of after-school programmes across the US has never been considered a "good idea". ALSO READ | 12 states sue Donald Trump administration in trade court to stop tariff policy Alabama State Superintendent of Education Eric Mackey said that this will affect the students with the "greatest need". He told ABC News, "The loss of funding for those rural, poor, high poverty school districts, is just going to be, you know, more fuel for the fire that makes it more difficult to educate children in those communities." Christy Gleason, executive director of Save the Children Action Network, which provides after-school programming for 41 schools in rural areas of Washington and across the South, where the school year is set to begin as soon as August, said, "Time is of the essence." "It's not too late to make a decision, so the kids who really need this still have it," she added.
India Today
12 minutes ago
- India Today
Lula to sign Brazil's new reciprocal tariff law amid US trade tensions
Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva will officially sign a new law on Monday that allows Brazil to respond to unfair foreign trade practices. The law, passed by Congress in April, will let the government impose reciprocal tariffs on countries that hurt Brazil's economy with their trade Chief of Staff, Rui Costa, said the decree will be published in Brazil's official gazette on Tuesday. The announcement comes days after US President Donald Trump said he would place a 50% tariff on Brazilian response to Trump's announcement, Brazil is preparing to fight back. Lula's administration plans to match the 50% tariff on US goods entering Brazil. "Brazil is a sovereign nation with independent institutions and will not accept any form of tutelage," Lula said firmly in an X added that the legal matters concerning Brazil's internal governance -- including investigations related to past coup attempts -- are handled solely by Brazil's Judicial Branch and should not be interfered with by any foreign EFFORTS TO AVOID TRADE CONFLICTWhile Vice President Geraldo Alckmin said on Monday that the government has set up a working group to discuss the US tariffs with business leaders. The first meeting will take place Tuesday morning, followed by another session later in the day with agribusiness group plans to keep meeting regularly to find the best solutions. Alckmin said that the tariffs would also hurt US companies, so Brazil will talk to them as well. "US companies will also be hit by the tariffs announced by the US, so we will also talk to them," he CHALLENGES US TRADE FIGURESMeanwhile, Lula questioned the accuracy of US trade deficit claims, saying that the US has actually had a trade surplus with Brazil."The claim regarding a US trade deficit in its commercial relationship with Brazil is inaccurate. Statistics from the US government itself show a surplus of $410 billion in the trade of goods and services with Brazil over the past 15 years," Lula explained.- EndsWith inputs from ReutersTune InMust Watch
Mint
16 minutes ago
- Mint
US Supreme Court greenlights Donald Trump's education department layoffs
The Supreme Court allowed President Trump to restart mass layoffs at the U.S. Education Department, impacting nearly 1,400 employees. In a 6-3 decision, the conservative majority lifted a lower court's order that had blocked the firings and required worker reinstatements. Education Secretary Linda McMahon called the ruling a 'significant win,' enabling her to advance Trump's executive order to close the department 'to the maximum extent permitted by law'. The layoffs, affecting one-third of the agency's workforce, are part of Trump's broader push to shrink federal government roles and return education oversight to states. Justice Sonia Sotomayor led a fiery dissent, joined by liberal justices Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson. She accused the majority of enabling 'lawlessness,' writing that Trump's plan 'usurps Congress's power' by effectively abolishing a congressionally created agency. Sotomayor warned the cuts would 'unleash untold harm,' crippling enforcement of civil rights laws, support for disabled students, and anti-discrimination efforts. The dissent highlighted Trump's public vow to eliminate the department—evidence that the administration aimed to 'break the law'. Twenty-one Democratic states and teachers' unions sued, arguing the layoffs would paralyze critical programs. They cited risks to $1.6 trillion in student loans, special education services, and aid for low-income schools—all congressionally mandated duties. Massachusetts districts warned of irreversible damage, like delayed financial aid that could force teacher layoffs. Employees, on paid leave since March, now face termination. A union representative lamented, 'This guts our capacity to protect students'. This ruling follows last week's Supreme Court approval of Trump's federal workforce reductions, cementing his campaign promise to 'dismantle the administrative state'. The Education Department's closure plan includes transferring student loans to the Small Business Administration and disability programs to Health and Human Services. Legal challenges continue in lower courts, but the administration can now proceed during appeals. Critics fear similar targets for USAID and diversity programs under Trump's 'Department of Government Efficiency'.
