The Delhi Police’s Economic Offences Wing (EOW) has filed a fresh FIR — based on a complaint from Enforcement Directorate (ED) under the money-laundering probe.
The FIR invokes the following sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC): 120B (criminal conspiracy), 420 (cheating), 403 (dishonest misappropriation of property), and 406 (criminal breach of trust).
Additionally, money-laundering provisions under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA) are invoked: specifically Section 3 (offence), Section 4 (punishment), read with Section 70 (offences by companies), and via Section 66(2) (which allows ED to ask police to register predicate offences).
The FIR alleges that a “well-thought-out criminal conspiracy” was executed to fraudulently acquire control of Associated Journals Ltd (AJL) — the once-publisher of the now-defunct National Herald newspaper — along with its vast assets and real estate, valued at roughly ₹ 2,000 crore, for a paltry sum under the guise of a takeover.
According to the FIR / ED complaint:
A company, Young Indian (YI), majority-owned by Sonia and Rahul Gandhi (76% combined, 38% each), allegedly acquired nearly 99% of AJL’s shares by paying only ₹ 50 lakh.
The funds facilitating this takeover allegedly originated partly from another company, Dotex Merchandise Pvt Ltd (a Kolkata-based firm described as a shell company), which reportedly routed about ₹ 1 crore to Young Indian. This financial manoeuvre is claimed to have enabled the undervalued acquisition of AJL.
The FIR further states that the assets — including prime real estate properties in major cities (Delhi, Mumbai, Lucknow, Patna, etc.) — originally belonging to AJL were thus transferred to Young Indian via these allegedly fraudulent transactions.
The FIR names as accused: Sonia Gandhi, Rahul Gandhi; other individuals: Sam Pitroda, Suman Dubey; and companies/entities: Young Indian, Dotex Merchandise Pvt Ltd, AJL; along with some unnamed “others/unknowns.”
🧮 Background — What earlier investigations had flagged:
The ED had previously filed a chargesheet (April 2025) under PMLA against Sonia & Rahul Gandhi and others, alleging money-laundering and fraudulent acquisition of AJL assets.
According to the ED chargesheet, the takeover involved converting a zero-interest loan of about ₹ 90.21 crore (extended by the party / AICC to AJL) into equity, which was then assigned to Young Indian at nominal payment, giving Young Indian “beneficial ownership” over AJL assets.
The ED had estimated proceeds of crime in this case amounting to around ₹ 988 crore: this includes real estate, shares, and alleged rental income from AJL’s properties after takeover — assets which ED claims were under Young Indian’s control since 2010-11.
📅 What’s new now — Why fresh FIR matters?
The fresh FIR (filed on 3 October but reported 30 November 2025) formally brings IPC criminal charges against the accused — not just money-laundering under PMLA. This means the case now has dual legal dimensions: economic crimes (money laundering) and criminal wrongdoing under IPC.
Because the FIR is based on ED’s complaint under Section 66(2) of PMLA, it qualifies as a “predicate offence” — necessary under PMLA for pursuit of money-laundering charges.
The FIR may strengthen the ED’s case (previously under only economic laws) by adding an independent criminal-law shell, which can influence future judicial proceedings and affect bail/defense strategy.
⚠️ What supporters of the accused allege in response?
The principal opposition/defence position (as voiced by their party, Indian National Congress or Congress) describes the proceedings as “petty vendetta tactics” and claims the investigation is politically motivated.
They argue that the takeover of AJL may have been structured legally under corporate and debt-equity conversion norms, pointing to earlier board-level approvals, and questioning whether the mere fact of share conversion and asset transfer automatically constitutes “cheating” or “breach of trust.”
🕒 What’s next — Court schedule, what to watch?
The court in Delhi (Rouse Avenue / whichever court handling the matter) has deferred decision on taking cognizance of the earlier ED chargesheet; with next hearing scheduled for 16 December 2025.
The fresh FIR could change legal dynamics — e.g. widening scope, adding more charges, possibly triggering arrests or fresh summons, depending on how the court treats the allegations.
Independent verification of valuations, asset transfers, corporate paperwork, loan-equity conversions, and sequence of transactions could become central — so forensic audit records, shell-company trail (like Dotex → Young Indian → AJL) may be key evidence.
