“No Profit, No Assets!” Congress Leader Exposes Decade-Long Political Vendetta
Amid ongoing investigations in the National Herald money laundering case, senior Congress leader Supriya Shrinate issued a sharp rebuttal to the allegations against Young Indian Pvt. Ltd., which holds shares in Associated Journals Ltd. (AJL). Speaking to the media, Shrinate emphasized that Young Indian is a not-for-profit entity, registered under Section 25 of the Companies Act, 1956 (now Section 8 under the Companies Act, 2013).
#WATCH | Delhi | National Herald Money laundering case: Congress leader Supriya Shrinate says, "Section 25 company means not-for-profit company... Under this, the Director or any shareholder of such company cannot receive any profit or dividend... This case is being stretched… pic.twitter.com/wcNBBcg07H
— ANI (@ANI) July 3, 2025
She asserted that this classification legally bars any director or shareholder from profiting from the company’s earnings. “Section 25 company means not-for-profit company… Under this, the Director or any shareholder of such company cannot receive any profit or dividend,” she said.
Shrinate accused central agencies of dragging the case for over a decade to malign senior Congress leaders, including Sonia and Rahul Gandhi, who collectively hold 76% shares in Young Indian. “This case is being stretched since 11–12 years to destroy people’s reputation,” she said, claiming there’s no financial wrongdoing in the transaction between AJL and Young Indian.
SECTION-25: How Young Indian’s Nonprofit Status Obliterates ED Claims
A central element in the Congress’s defense is the legal status of Young Indian as a Section 25 company, which is established solely for promoting commerce, education, charity, or social welfare, with no intention of generating profit for its shareholders. These companies are prohibited from distributing dividends or financial gains to their stakeholders, making it fundamentally different from profit-oriented corporations.
According to Shrinate, this status alone nullifies the Enforcement Directorate’s (ED) charge of money laundering or profit-driven asset acquisition. “The law is clear—no person associated with such a company can gain personally. So where is the question of laundering money or acquiring assets for gain?” she asked.
The Congress argues that Young Indian only became a shareholder of AJL—which owns the defunct National Herald newspaper—without any transfer of assets or diversion of income. AJL’s properties and financial operations remain independent, and no real estate or commercial holdings were passed on to Young Indian.
Shrinate Accuses BJP of Weaponizing the ED Against Congress
Shrinate further accused the ruling BJP government of weaponizing federal agencies like the ED to launch politically motivated attacks on opposition leaders. The case, filed over a decade ago, has been a consistent tool of political pressure, according to the Congress party.
“No assets were taken over, no profit was made, and no law was broken. Yet, the case continues to resurface just before elections or major political developments,” Shrinate said. She emphasized that the ED has not provided conclusive proof of financial wrongdoing in all these years.
The National Herald case involves complex layers of political history, financial structure, and legal nuance. For the Congress, the narrative is clear: a non-profit entity became a shareholder in a legacy institution, and the case is being used to discredit the party leadership.
As the case unfolds, the debate remains sharply divided between legal interpretation and political intent, with the Congress standing firm on its position that Young Indian’s structure and actions fall squarely within legal limits.
