BackNational Herald case: Sonia Gandhi, Rahul Gandhi move Supreme Court
Sonia's plea said the HC order went against established principles of criminal law about quashing of summons
Premium
New Delhi: After putting up a strong show at the Patiala House courts in December last year, Congress leaders Sonia Gandhi and Rahul Gandhi on Thursday moved the Supreme Court against a Delhi high court order asking them to appear before a trial court over allegations of misappropriation of funds in the now defunct National Herald newspaper.
The petition filed by Sonia Gandhi, a copy of which Mint has reviewed, said that the high court order went against established principles of criminal law regarding quashing of summons. The petition filed by Rahul is similar to Sonia’s.
It sought the setting aside of not just the high court order, and the quashing of the summons issued by the metropolitan magistrate in 2014 on Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leader Subramanian Swamy’s complaint.
The petition also urged the Supreme Court to set aside the very complaint.
In the interim, the petition sought a stay on the proceedings before the trial court, which is set to hear the case on 20 February.
Sonia Gandhi’s petition asked the apex court to exempt her from personal appearance.
On 30 July 2014, Congress leaders approached the Delhi high court against summons issued to them by the trial court on 26 June in connection with Swamy’s complaint.
The high court on 7 December ruled that Rahul, Sonia and four others should appear before the trial court as summoned.
The others named in the case include Motilal Vora, treasurer of the All India Congress Committee; Congress general secretary Oscar Fernandes; and directors of Young Indian Ltd Suman Dubey and Sam Pitroda.
They have also moved the apex court.
Young Indian Ltd, floated in 2010, obtained the right to recover ₹ 90.25 crore which the Associated Journal Ltd (AJL) owed to the Congress party. AJL published the National Herald.
In his complaint, Swamy alleged that the party assigned the ₹ 90.25 crore it loaned to AJL to Young Indian on 28 December 2010 for a mere ₹ 50 lakh. This, according to him, amounted to breach of trust, cheating, fraud and misappropriation of funds.
While the Delhi high court backed its decision by saying that private citizens of the country had the right to challenge instances of alleged corruption, Sonia argued that Swamy had no legal authority to file such a complaint against her. Swamy was not a member of the BJP when he filed the case.
Her petition said that the high court’s comments against the Congress were unwarranted and added that the court found ground for criminal intent without actual evidence or going into the main merit of the case. The high court’s observations go beyond Swamy’s complaint, the petition said.
“It is rather unfortunate that in the impugned judgment, the facts on record, the pleas raised by the accused and the legal questions emerging from the petitions have neither been noted nor discussed. The tenor of the impugned judgment suggests that the case of the complainant as well as that of the petitioner has not been considered on the basis of the material placed on record before the learned single judge," Sonia’s petition, filed by advocate Devadatt Kamat, said.
Thursday’s development comes in the backdrop of the Congress party holding a massive show of strength with almost its entire senior leadership in attendance outside the Patiala House courts on 19 December.
“This is a natural progression of the case and we are following all legal remedies available to us," a senior Congress leader said in response to Thursday’s development, requesting anonymity.
“The (high) court took a strong stand and maybe the Congress party did not expect it. The approach that the Congress had towards the case and in stalling Parliament over the issue did not go down well with the people," said A.K. Verma, Kanpur-based political analyst and political science professor at Christ Church College.
“Maybe sensing the mood of the people and the upcoming state elections, the Congress decided to dilute its aggressive stance and instead take legal recourse. However, if they do decide to raise this issue in the budget session, it would be politically counter-productive for them," he added.
The budget session of Parliament is set to begin on 23 February.
Unlock a world of Benefits! From insightful newsletters to real-time stock tracking, breaking news and a personalized newsfeed – it's all here, just a click away! Login Now!
