The Enforcement Directorate (ED) has taken the National Herald case to the next legal stage by approaching the Delhi High Court, challenging a recent trial court order that declined to take cognisance of its money laundering complaint against senior Congress leaders Sonia Gandhi and Rahul Gandhi.
The appeal, filed on Friday, seeks to overturn the decision of Delhi’s Rouse Avenue Court, which had refused to proceed with the ED’s chargesheet under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA). The lower court’s ruling had effectively halted immediate prosecution, dealing a major blow to the central agency’s long-running probe into alleged financial irregularities linked to the National Herald newspaper.
In its appeal, the ED has argued that the trial court failed to properly appreciate key evidence and legal provisions, leading to what it describes as an erroneous interpretation of the law. The agency has urged the High Court to review the order and direct the trial court to formally register the case and summon the accused, which could potentially reopen attachment proceedings and further investigation related to the multi-crore case.
The Rouse Avenue Court had earlier held that the ED’s case was not legally maintainable at the cognisance stage, as it was based on a private complaint and a past summoning order rather than a registered FIR for the scheduled offence. The court emphasized that under PMLA provisions, prosecution for money laundering requires the existence of a predicate offence supported by an FIR, calling it a jurisdictional prerequisite.
Importantly, the trial court refrained from examining the merits of the allegations, focusing instead on procedural legality. It also took note of a fresh FIR registered by Delhi Police’s Economic Offences Wing (EOW) in October 2025, clarifying that both agencies are free to pursue further investigation independently under the law.
Legal experts note that the High Court’s response to the ED’s appeal could have significant implications, not only for the National Herald case but also for how money laundering prosecutions are initiated in cases originating from private complaints.
Reacting to the trial court’s decision earlier, senior Congress leader and legal counsel Abhishek Manu Singhvi had termed it a justified outcome, arguing that the case lacked any evidence of actual money transfer or illicit asset diversion. The Congress has consistently maintained that the case is politically motivated, while the ED has defended its actions as part of a lawful financial probe.
