Abhishek manu Singhvi, the lawyer representing congress leader sonia gandhi in the National Herald case, said on friday (July 04, 2025) that this is indeed a strange case. This is an alleged case of money laundering, in which no money or property has been diverted. There has been no use or change of property. AJL has property all over the country, AJL has had property for decades, the ownership of not a single property has been changed and not even an inch.
Abhishek manu Singhvi said that AJL had to be made debt free, the reason for taking a loan and handing it over to someone else is the same as happens in normal corporate companies, so that the debt can be relieved. It is a non-profit company, it cannot share dividends etc. Former congress President, current congress President and other leaders are part of the company, because without congress, National Herald has no justification. It is a legacy.
No congress leader got property
Abhishek manu Singhvi said that not even a millimetre of property was moved from AJL to Young Indian. No congress leader got any money or any property, yet it is being called money laundering. In 2021, it was made a case in ED. Now what did ED do for so many years. A complaint was filed in 2013. When shares are transferred to Young indian, the ownership of the property also remains with AJL. All that happened was that Young indian got 99% of AJL.
Cited the law of 50 years ago
Singhvi further said, 'Young india has 100% shares of AJL. If we look at the supreme Court's decision in the vodafone case from 1954, Young india does not have any property of AJL. When the ownership remains with AJL, then how did this money laundering happen.'
Citing a judgment, Singhvi said that what was recognised by the law 50 years ago is now being considered money laundering. This is a case in which money laundering is done even when the company is closed and according to the current law, if the company is closed then its property will remain with the company under Section 8, and not with its shareholders.
'Neither FIR nor investigation'
Advocate Singhvi further said that this is a proceeding which does not exist, which the court has to take cognizance of. Cognizance cannot be taken on the ED chargesheet, because there is neither any FIR nor any complaint from the person responsible for the investigation. To start the prosecution, the document should come from someone who has the authority.
click and follow Indiaherald WhatsApp channel