National Herald case: Congress escalates its critique of the BJP-led government after a Delhi court declined to take cognizance of the Enforcement Directorate’s (ED) prosecution complaint in the National Herald money‑laundering matter.
Congress president Mallikarjun Kharge accused the Modi administration of weaponizing central agencies to intimidate opposition figures, with a focus on the Gandhi family. He contended that the actions are politically motivated harassment and insisted there is no formal FIR in the case. Expressing optimism about the verdict, Kharge stated that the party would mobilize support and emphasized seven years of alleged ED pressure on the opposition. He urged Prime Minister Modi and Home Minister Amit Shah to step down in light of the ruling, arguing they should stop troubling the public.
Congress general secretary K C Venugopal said the decision has energized party workers nationwide and announced planned nationwide demonstrations to highlight what he calls the ED’s systemic targeting of opposition leaders. Senior Congress leader and Rajya Sabha MP Abhishek Manu Singhvi framed the matter as an episode of power misuse, describing the National Herald case as evidence of central agencies overreach. He noted that while allegations existed, the grounds were baseless, and the law ultimately stood firm. Singhvi pointed out that from 2021 to 2025 the ED conducted multiple high‑profile interrogations of senior Congress leaders, including Rahul Gandhi and Kharge, which received broad media attention.
Singhvi previously labeled the issue a “National Harassment case,” denying money‑laundering claims against Sonia Gandhi, Rahul Gandhi, and others. He also accused the ED of being “colour blind,” arguing that justice should be blind but the ED appears to target the opposition in particular. The relief came after Special Judge Vishal Gogne of the Rouse Avenue Courts ruled that proceedings under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act could not proceed without a scheduled‑offence FIR, stating that the ED’s complaint—rooted in a private complaint by Subramanian Swamy rather than an FIR—was legally impermissible.
