Itanagar, Apr 16: The state unit of Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) on Wednesday dismissed the Congress party’s allegations of political vendetta in the National Herald case, asserting that the ongoing legal action is based on prima facie evidence and due judicial process.
Addressing a press conference at party headquarters here, Aalo West MLA and spokesperson Topin Ete said the case was initiated during the tenure of the Congress-led UPA government following a private complaint filed by BJP leader Subramanian Swamy in 2012 and has since followed the legal course.
“There is no personal vendetta. The case has moved forward purely on the basis of facts and evidence. The High Court and the Supreme Court have not quashed the proceedings, which speaks for itself,” Ete said.
The Enforcement Directorate (ED) recently filed a chargesheet against Congress leaders Sonia Gandhi and Rahul Gandhi in the alleged financial irregularities related to the acquisition of Associated Journals Limited (AJL) by Young Indian Pvt Ltd, in which the two leaders hold a majority stake.
The BJP alleged that the Congress leadership misused public assets by transferring properties worth thousands of crores from AJL to Young Indian for a nominal amount, turning a non-profit entity into a vehicle for personal enrichment.
Rejecting the Congress's claims of misuse of investigative agencies, Ete further clarified that the probe began in 2013 as per a Delhi High Court order and pre-dates the BJP coming to power.
The BJP maintained that the matter is being dealt with strictly in accordance with the law and urged the Congress to cooperate with the investigation instead of politicising the issue.
Congress terms ED chargesheet ‘political vendetta’
The Arunachal Pradesh Congress Committee (APCC) staged a protest at the Rajiv Gandhi Bhawan here on Wednesday, expressing opposition to the Enforcement Directorate’s chargesheet against Congress Parliamentary Party Chairperson Sonia Gandhi and Leader of Opposition Rahul Gandhi in the National Herald case.
Addressing the gathering, APCC vice-president Mina Toko and general secretary Kipa Kaha accused the Enforcement Directorate (ED) of acting on politically motivated directives. The leaders termed the recent development as an attempt to suppress dissent and undermine democratic opposition ahead of critical electoral battles, including the Bihar Assembly elections.
The National Herald case, which originated from a 2012 complaint, was earlier considered closed, and Congress leaders questioned the timing and rationale behind its revival. The APCC argued that the chargesheet lacks substantive evidence and alleged that no money movement or property transaction has occurred to warrant a money laundering case.
The APCC further criticised the BJP and the central government for what it termed “selective application of investigative agencies,” accusing the ED of ignoring corruption cases involving political figures who joined the BJP or business entities seen as close to the ruling party.
Allegations were also raised over the government’s inability to recover funds from economic fugitives or investigate alleged loan waivers, which APCC claimed amounted to over Rs 16 lakh crore.
The protest was positioned as part of a broader political narrative accusing the BJP of weakening democratic institutions by targeting opposition leaders through central agencies. Referring to past instances such as the arrest of then-Delhi chief minister Arvind Kejriwal and demonetisation ahead of the Uttar Pradesh elections, APCC said the current action fits a pattern of electoral strategy using institutional mechanisms.
APCC spokesperson Kon Jirjo Jotham demanded the immediate withdrawal of the chargesheet and accountability for ED officials involved in the case. He stated that the protest was not merely about two individuals but about safeguarding the democratic right to dissent.
The APCC appealed to other political parties and civil society organisations to resist what it described as “institutional misuse for political gain” and called for a collective response to defend democratic norms and constitutional values.
