Latest news with #SVRaju
India Today
08-08-2025
- Politics
- India Today
Concerned with ED's image: Top court asks probe agency to improve investigation
The Supreme Court on Thursday made sharp observations against the Enforcement Directorate (ED) while hearing pleas seeking a review of its earlier verdict upholding key provisions of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA).'We are equally concerned with the image of the ED. Improve your investigation, improve your witnesses," the bench remarked. The Court flagged the poor conviction rate under PMLA, noting the gap between the number of registered cases and outcomes. 'In one of the cases we observed — you registered over 5,000 ECIRs. Conviction is less than 10,' the bench It also expressed concern over prolonged custody of accused persons. 'At the end of five or six years, when they've remained in custody and are acquitted What happens then?' the bench address delays, the Court suggested setting up special courts with day-to-day trials for ED, UAPA, and NIA cases. 'Go for day to day trials. Unless you ensure this, all these malpractices — good or bad — will continue,' the bench bench added that in daily trials, everyone knows that what is left today would be taken up for the ED, Additional Solicitor General SV Raju said investigators were overburdened. 'We are terribly handicapped. Investigators are even more burdened than the courts. Crooks have everything these days,' he said. The Court responded, 'You can't act like crooks. You have to act within the four corners of the law. There is a difference between law-enforcing authorities and law-violating bodies.'The ASG said influential accused often file numerous applications, forcing investigating officers to spend time in court instead of probing cases. He also cited 'procedural weaponisation,' saying, 'If we give a pen drive, they want a hard drive. If we give a hard drive, they want a pen drive.'Acknowledging the hurdles, the bench stressed structural changes. 'Unless trials happen daily, these tricks — good or bad — will keep surfacing.'The Court also flagged risks related to cryptocurrency, warning it could be misused. 'People will start taking bribes in crypto,' the bench noted, asking the ASG, 'But you don't want to regulate it?' The ASG replied, 'We're trying, but it becomes difficult.' The Court responded, 'No one said ban it. But it can be regulated. Even regular currency is regulated.' - EndsTune InMust Watch
India Gazette
14-07-2025
- Politics
- India Gazette
Centre questions maintainability of PFI's plea against ban in Delhi HC
New Delhi [India], July 14 (ANI): The Central government on Monday objected to the legal validity of a petition on maintainability ground filed by the Popular Front of India (PFI) in the Delhi High Court, challenging the confirmation of a five-year ban imposed on the organization under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA). During the hearing, the Additional Solicitor General (ASG) S V Raju, representing the Centre, argued that the petition was not maintainable under Articles 226 or 227 of the Constitution. He submitted that the tribunal upholding the ban was led by a sitting High Court judge, and therefore, any challenge to its order should be made under Article 136 in the Supreme Court, not in the High Court. The ASG also stated that the authority of a High Court judge presiding over a tribunal does not fall under the purview of subordinate courts. PFI's counsel countered by referencing a previous ruling by a division bench of the High Court, which, according to them, allows the petition to be heard. However, the bench comprising Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela decided to re-list the matter for further arguments, listing the next hearing on August 7. The court has not yet issued a formal notice on the petition. PFI's petition contests the tribunal's order from March 2024, which affirmed the Centre's September 2022 decision to ban the organisation and its affiliates for allegedly engaging in terrorist activities and promoting communal hatred. The Ministry of Home Affairs declared PFI and its linked groups--including the Campus Front of India, Rehab India Foundation, and National Women's Front--as 'unlawful associations' under UAPA. The government cited extensive evidence, including video materials and testimony from over 100 witnesses, to justify the ban. It claimed connections between PFI and other proscribed groups such as ISIS, SIMI, and Jamaat-ul-Mujahideen Bangladesh (JMB), along with involvement in financing terrorism, executing targeted killings, and destabilising public order. Following the crackdown in September 2022, more than 150 individuals reportedly linked to PFI were detained across India. (ANI)
Time of India
08-07-2025
- Politics
- Time of India
Young Indian-AJL transaction a sham: ASG in Herald case
Representative image NEW DELHI: Additional solicitor general SV Raju claimed before a Delhi court Tuesday that transaction between Associated Journals Ltd and Young Indian Pvt Ltd was a sham transaction in an alleged money laundering case in the National Herald matter. "All India Congress Committee was given funds, which were to be used properly, but the way they used Rs 90 crore shows they committed criminal breach of trust," the ASG argued. The ASG's arguments will continue Saturday before the court of special judge Vishal Gogne, which is hearing arguments on the point of cognisance of chargesheet filed against Sonia Gandhi , Rahul Gandhi , & others. Court posted the matter to July 12 for further proceedings. After rebuttal arguments by all seven accused in the case were completed Tuesday, the ASG submitted his rebuttals before the court. According to ED, Sonia and Rahul Gandhi, along with others and Young Indian, conspired to launder money by fraudulent takeover of properties valued over at Rs 2,000 crore belonging to AJL. As per ED, the Gandhis held a majority 76% shares in Young Indian, which fraudulently usurped assets of AJL in exchange for a Rs 90 crore loan.
News18
03-07-2025
- Business
- News18
'Young Indian, A Congress Front, Made Wrongful Gains': ED's Charge Against Gandhis In AJL Case
Last Updated: The Enforcement Directorate told the court that the Gandhis committed a massive fraud by wrongfully transferring 99% of AJL's shares to Young Indian, sidelining major shareholders. The not-for-profit company Young Indian (YI), controlled by Gandhis, was created to distract attention from a national party, it is just another face of the Congress, and made wrongful gains, the Enforcement Directorate told Delhi's Rouse Avenue Court in connection with a money laundering complaint in the National Herald case. The ED also said that there cannot be a bigger fraud, adding, the Gandhis took a fraudulent decision which resulted in wrongful loss to major shareholders of the Associated Journals Limited (AJL). The directors at Young Indian were the bosses of the Congress party, the ED told the court, as Additional Solicitor General (ASG) SV Raju reiterated Young Indian was nothing more than another face of the Congress party. As per the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, anyone owning more than 25 per cent shares controls the interest in the firm, the ED said. In its argument, the probe agency further said that the Gandhi family shunned out major shareholders, and that not only the AJL, but the All India Congress Committee (AICC) was also cheated. Responding to the court on why the Congress was not a shareholder in the AJL, the ED said the trust belonging to Priyanka Gandhi had certain shares, but not 50 per cent. The probe agency also revealed that the AJL also had other shareholders. The Enforcement Directorate said that a meeting was held in Lucknow on January 21, 2011, in which it was decided to increase the shareholding of the AJL and to issue Rs 9.02 crore shares to Young Indian, in lieu of the Rs 90.2 crore loan. However, the majority of AJL shareholders were not present in the meeting, the ED said, adding, it was evident that a crucial decision of vesting 99 per cent shareholding of AJL with Young Indian was made with only the presence of seven members, including two accused in the case. The probe agency also said that no reasonable efforts were made to call the majority of shareholders for the meeting. On Wednesday, while hearing the ED's arguments on the case, Delhi's Rouse Avenue Court raised certain queries to the ED about the shareholding of the AJL and whether the Congress party was a victim, as it had provided a loan to AJL. ASG Raju submitted that there was a conspiracy to siphon off the assets of AJL, a company with assets worth Rs 2,000 crore, a fact known to Congress leaders. Special Judge Vishal Gogne heard the arguments at length for nearly three hours and listed the matter for further hearing on July 3. The ED filed a prosecution complaint (charge sheet) against seven persons – Congress leaders Sonia Gandhi, Rahul Gandhi, Suman Dubey, Sam Pitroda, Young Indian, Dotex, and Sunil Bhandari. The Congress provided a loan of Rs 90.25 crore to the AJL, which had no means to repay despite holding assets worth Rs 2,000 crores, ASG Raju submitted. He alleged that the accused aimed to usurp AJL, with its Rs 2,000 crore assets, by creating Young Indian. The ED argued that Young Indian acquired AJL for just Rs 50 lakh in exchange for the Rs 90 crore loan provided by the Congress. The ED further stated that the accused firm, Dotex, gave a Rs 1 crore loan to Young Indian, out of which Rs 50 lakh was paid to the AICC. Consequently, Young Indian became the owner of AJL for Rs 50 lakh.
Time of India
19-06-2025
- Business
- Time of India
ED tells HC it has no power to seal premises
Chennai: The Enforcement Directorate has submitted before the Madras High Court that it has no power to seal the premises, if the same was locked at the time of making search under the provisions of PMLA. Additional Solicitor General S V Raju made the submission when the petitions filed by film producer Akash Bhaskaran and businessman Vikram Ravindran came up for hearing before a division bench comprising Justices M S Ramesh and V Lakshminarayanan on Wednesday. In their petitions, Akash and Vikram challenged the action of ED in conducting the search at their residence and office and sealing the same. Play Video Pause Skip Backward Skip Forward Unmute Current Time 0:00 / Duration 0:00 Loaded : 0% 0:00 Stream Type LIVE Seek to live, currently behind live LIVE Remaining Time - 0:00 1x Playback Rate Chapters Chapters Descriptions descriptions off , selected Captions captions settings , opens captions settings dialog captions off , selected Audio Track default , selected Picture-in-Picture Fullscreen This is a modal window. Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window. Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Opacity Opaque Semi-Transparent Text Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Opacity Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Caption Area Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Opacity Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Drop shadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps Reset restore all settings to the default values Done Close Modal Dialog End of dialog window. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Villa For Sale in Dubai Might Surprise You Villas in Dubai | Search ads Learn More Undo When the case came up, the bench questioned the power of ED to seal the premises. Raju submitted that the central prove agency has no power to seal the premises. However, it has powers under section 17 of Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) to break open the lock. But, the ED did not want to escalate the situation, he added. Live Events He also informed the bench that the ED was instructed to withdraw the notice pasted on the premises of the petitioners and to return all the seized material. Following this, the bench reserved orders on the interim applications and posted after four weeks, the hearing on the main petitions.
