National Herald case: SC relief to Gandhis, but trial will go on

The Supreme Court on Friday refused to quash the proceedings against Congress president Sonia Gandhi and her son, party vice-president Rahul Gandhi, in the National Herald case, but granted partial relief by exempting them from personal appearance in court for the hearing scheduled for February 20 and thereafter.

A bench of Justices J.S. Khehar and C. Nagappan declined to entertain an appeal filed by the Gandhis challenging a Delhi high court judgment refusing to quash the proceedings. “Let there be fair trial and we will give you full opportunity to raise all issues before the trial court at the time of framing of charges,” the bench told senior counsel Kapil Sibal and Abhishek Singhvi, appearing for the petitioners. The two leaders had appeared in the trial court on December 19, 2015, which granted them bail in the case. The Congress had accused the NDA and BJP leader Subramanian Swamy of political vendetta in pursuing the case. Dr Swami in his private complaint had accused the Gandhis and four others in the Congress of attempting to illegally acquire real estate worth thousands of crores of rupees belonging to National Herald, a newspaper founded by Jawaharlal Nehru and now defunct.

Mr Sibal argued that the essential ingredient in the offences of cheating and criminal breach of trust — two allegations foisted against the accused in the case — is that only the aggrieved person has the locus to file a complaint in court. He said the proceedings in the trial court cannot continue as the ingredients of cheating, criminal breach of trust or misappropriation are not satisfied. “I cannot be sent to trial without even a statement from a victim,” Mr Sibal said. Mr Singhvi said, “Here Swamy has not been allegedly deceived. There is not a whisper of a complaint from the millions of Congressmen about their leaders.”

At the outset the bench made it clear that it will not interfere with the high court order refusing to quash the proceedings. “We are not happy with what the HC judge has said on merits of the case. To this limited extent we will interfere and expunge the observations as the conclusions drawn by the judge will prejudice the trial. Let there be a fair trial and we will allow the trial to proceed. You (petitioners) will have ample opportunity to raise all issues, including the question of locus standi of Dr Swamy and maintainability of the private complaint before the trial court, at the time of framing of charges.”

When Dr Swamy opposed grant of personal exemption to the Gandhis saying it is the prerogative of the magistrate to grant exemption, Justice Khehar observed, “When people of such prominence are there, they are not going to run away from trial. If on a particular occasion you need them, call for their appearance. Their presence will cause more inconvenience than convenience in the court. The trial court judge could seek a personal appearance of the two top Congress leaders if it needed to at any stage in the case.”

The bench directed expunging the observations made by the high court, particularly the remarks and conclusions on the alleged involvement of Ms Sonia Gandhi and Mr Rahul Gandhi and how the case had dragged the reputation of the “legendary” Congress party into the mud. The judge had further observed that there was evidence of criminal intent against the accused.