National Herald case: Delhi Court seeks ED clarifications on chargesheet

On October 25, 2025, a special court in Delhi has put off the hearing on the National Herald case, seeking further clarification from the Enforcement Directorate in the case involving Congress leaders Sonia and Rahul Gandhi, among others. This is the sixth time the court has postponed or deferred hearings on the case. Since the filing of the chargesheet by the Enforcement Directorate in April 2025, the court has yet to frame charges and begin the trial.

On Saturday, Special Judge Vishal Gogne, presiding over the National Herald case at the Rouse Avenue Court in Delhi, indicated that specific clarification from ED is needed for the court to take cognisance of the prosecution complaint. In the previous hearing, the court sought details from the probe agency over its framing of Sonia Gandhi, Rahul Gandhi, Sam Pitroda and others as accused. The hearing is scheduled for October 30.

National Herald case

The National Herald case surfaced 12 years ago when former BJP MP Subramanian Swamy alleged misappropriation of funds and illegal acquisition of Associated Journals Limited (AJL) assets by Young Indian Pvt Ltd. Congress Leader Sonia Gandhi and Rahul Gandhi are majority stakeholders of Young Indian. In April 2025, the ED filed its chargesheet, which alleged that the All India Congress Committee (AICC) assigned an interest-free and unsecured loan of 90.25 crore to AJL. AJL then issued 9.02 crore new equity shares to YI, and YI bought the debt for a nominal fee of 50 lakh, owning 99 per cent equity of AJL and its valuable real estate assets. The prosecution claims that the 'sham' transaction was done to fraudulently gain control of AJL's assets.

The prosecution argues that AJL was originally owned by thousands of freedom fighters and others, whose shares were rendered valueless because of the acquisition of AJL by YI. It challenges how a political party can enter into a commercial transaction of giving loans, and the subsequent transaction, a highly unusual debt-to-equity conversion, was suspicious. The court questioned why AJL's shareholders were not investigated as evidence. It also argues why the transactions are so suspicious that they warrant investigations, as AICC is not the accused. Moreover, loan write-offs happen more often.

The defence represented by senior advocates Abhishek Manu Singhvi and R.S. Cheema argues that YI is not for profit organisation and no individual can use the profit or assets for financial gain. It was intended as a revival for the historic newspaper National Herald. AJL did launch a digital version of the National Herald in November 2016. Congress argues that by transferring AJL to YI, the assets were protected from being sold for personal gain. They described the allegations as 'really strange' and ‘unprecedented’.