[ad_1]
Senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, representing Congress leader Sonia Gandhi, argued that the Enforcement Directorate’s (ED) National Herald case is ‘truly a strange’ one, news agency PTI said.Singhvi began his rebuttal after additional Solicitor General SV Raju for ED on July 3 concluded his arguments on the point of cognisance of the chargesheet filed in the case.Also Read | National Herald case: ED alleges conspiracy to take over ₹2,000 cr AJL firm”This is truly a strange case. More than strange. Unprecedented. This is an alleged case of money laundering, without any property, without use or projection of property,” Singhvi argued.The agency has accused Sonia and Rahul Gandhi, late Congress leaders Motilal Vora and Oscar Fernandes, Suman Dubey, Sam Pitroda, and a private company, Young Indian, of conspiracy and money laundering over the fraudulent takeover of properties valued over ₹2,000 crore”> ₹2,000 crore belonging to the Associated Journals Limited (AJL), which published theNational Herald newspaper.Sonia and Rahul were named as accused number 1 and number 2 in the chargesheet. This was the first time a chargesheet has been filed against Sonia Gandhi and Rahul Gandhi.ED alleges Gandhis held the majority 76 per cent shares in Young Indian, which fraudulently usurped AJL’s assets in exchange for a ₹90 crore loan.Also Read | Delhi court refuses to issue notices to Sonia, Rahul in National Herald caseSinghvi, however, submitted that the exercise was undertaken to make AJL debt-free.”Every company is entitled under law and does, every day, make their companies get free by a variety of instruments. So you take away the debt and assign it to another entity. So this company becomes debt free,” Singhvi said.‘Not-for-profit company’He said that Young Indian was a not-for-profit company. “This means it cannot give dividends, perks, salaries, or bonuses. It can give nothing,” the senior lawyer argued.Singhvi said the ED did not do anything for several years and instead picked up a private complaint.”They are, obviously people associated with the Congress. To have the National Herald in a body not associated with the Congress would be worse than having Hamlet without the Prince of Denmark,” he said.Singhvi continued by mentioning the grounds on which the present court did not have the jurisdiction to try the case.Also Read | National Herald: Sonia, Rahul Gandhi got ₹142 cr as proceeds of crime, says EDOn July 3, Raju argued on the point of chargesheet’s cognisance, saying the Gandhis were the “beneficial owners” of Young Indian and acquired its total control after the death of other shareholders.The ED filed its chargesheet against the Gandhis and others under Sections 3 (money laundering) and 4 (punishment for money laundering) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA).This is truly a strange case. More than strange. Unprecedented. This is an alleged case of money laundering, without any property, without use or projection of property.The chargesheet also names Dudey, Pitroda, Sunil Bhandari, Young Indian, and Dotex Merchandise Private Limited.
[ad_2]
Source link
