Gandhis Challenge ED's National Herald Probe in Delhi High Court

Congress leaders Sonia Gandhi and Rahul Gandhi have filed a written response in the Delhi High Court in the National Herald case, arguing that the Enforcement Directorate's money laundering investigation was set in motion by "extraneous considerations".

In the reply, the two leaders contend that the ED registered an Enforcement Case Information Report (ECIR) on the basis of a private complaint filed by former Union Minister Subramanian Swamy, a step they say is not permitted in law. They describe the National Herald matter as the only instance in the country where the agency has launched a money laundering probe on a private complaint.

The Gandhis point to the agency's own stated position that a money laundering investigation cannot begin without an FIR in a scheduled or predicate offence. Swamy filed his complaint in 2014, but no ECIR followed at the time; the case was registered nearly seven years later, on June 30, 2021. That delay, the response argues, shows the ED itself once believed that action under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act could not rest solely on a private complaint.

According to the response, the agency has not explained before either the trial court or the High Court why this case is being handled differently from others, and its "calculated silence" raises questions about an approach that is said to run contrary to the law and to international FATF standards.

The case traces back to Swamy's private complaint accusing Sonia Gandhi, Rahul Gandhi, Motilal Vora, Oscar Fernandes, Suman Dubey, Sam Pitroda and Young Indian, a company controlled by the Gandhi family, of fraud, criminal conspiracy, criminal breach of trust and misappropriation of property.

On April 15, 2025, the ED filed a prosecution complaint against Rahul Gandhi, Sonia Gandhi, Sam Pitroda and others. On December 16, 2025, the trial court declined to take cognisance, holding that the matter rested on a private complaint before a magistrate rather than an FIR and could not proceed on that footing.

The ED moved the High Court the following day, December 17, 2025. The Gandhis argue that this swift challenge, in a matter requiring approvals at multiple levels, betrays the agency's "extraordinary interest" and "undue haste".

They maintain that the ED's appeal is not legally maintainable, as the trial court's order was in accordance with law and suffered from neither jurisdictional error nor illegality. Calling the petition an "abuse of the legal process", they have sought its dismissal.

The matter came up before Justice Sachin Datta, who adjourned the hearing until October 12.