Excelsior Correspondent
NEW DELHI, June 15: Congress leader Rahul Gandhi appeared before the ED today for the third consecutive day of questioning in the National Herald money laundering case, with the agency seeking answers about his “personal role” in taking decisions with regard to the media organisation and its owner Young Indian.
Gandhi (51) arrived at the ED headquarters on APJ Abdul Kalam Road in central Delhi around 11.35 am with his “Z+” category CRPF security escort.
He was accompanied by his sister and Congress general secretary Priyanka Gandhi Vadra as his convoy whizzed past police barricades thronged by media persons and party supporters.
A huge contingent of police and paramilitary personnel has been deployed around the federal agency’s office, and prohibitory orders under Section 144 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) are in force.
The questioning began at 12 noon and the ED has been conducting a video and audio recording of the statement of Gandhi during all the three days’ sessions. His statements are being typed on A4 size papers and are minutely reviewed by him and signed before submission to the investigating officer.
Gandhi, sources said, is being asked about the assets worth about Rs 800 crore “owned” by AJL and how a not-for-profit company like Young Indian (YI) was undertaking commercial activities of renting out its land and building assets.
The Congress party has claimed that there was no FIR or scheduled offence in this case, on the basis of which a PMLA case was filed and Gandhi and his mother Congress president were summoned.
Officials said the ED action is on a “higher pedestal than that of proceedings undertaken on the basis of the FIR” as the court has taken cognisance of the Income Tax department charge sheet filed in the case and issued process.
They said sections 120B (criminal conspiracy) and 420 (cheating) of the IPC applied in the I-T case are “predicate offences” that enable the ED to register a money laundering case.
ED investigators said the offence of money laundering as defined under section 3 of the PMLA is being applied by the ED to probe the role of Gandhi in this entire case where “while there is no movement of cash but the proceeds of crime have been generated and some people have benefitted from them”.
Section 3 of the PMLA says whosoever directly or indirectly attempts to indulge or knowingly assists or knowingly is a party or is actually involved in any process or activity connected with proceeds of crime and projecting it as untainted property shall be guilty of the offence of money laundering.
Officials also counter the claim of the Congress party and even Gandhi who have maintained that YI was a non-profit company and no one can enjoy personal funds or shares of the company.