ED moves Supreme Court against relief to NewsClick in money laundering case

The ED has challenged the Delhi High Court's quashing of the NewsClick money laundering case in the Supreme Court. The appeal will test whether an ECIR survives after the underlying police FIR is quashed.Stock photo used for illustrationNewdelhi,Oct 24, 2026 21:52 ISTThe Enforcement Directorate has approached the Supreme Court against a Delhi High Court order quashing a money laundering case against news portal NewsClick and its editor-in-chief Prabir Purkayastha over alleged violations of foreign direct investment rules, news agency Press Trust of India reported.The agency has argued that the High Court quashed its enforcement case information report, or ECIR, without examining the case under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act. It also cited a delay of five months in the pronouncement of the judgement. The matter is yet to be listed for hearing.In its May 29 judgement, Justice Neena Bansal Krishna said the continuation of the FIR registered by the Delhi Police's Economic Offences Wing was "nothing but a gross abuse of the process of law". The court said that once the FIR in the underlying offence was quashed, the ED's ECIR was also liable to be closed.The Economic Offences Wing's 2020 FIR alleged that PPK Newsclick Studio Pvt Ltd, NewsClick's parent company, received foreign direct investment of Rs 9.59 crore from US-based Worldwide Media Holdings LLC in the 2018-19 financial year in violation of foreign investment law, causing a loss to the government exchequer. The FIR claimed the investment was made by greatly overvaluing the company's shares to avoid a 26 per cent cap on foreign direct investment in a digital news website. It also alleged that more than 45 per cent of the investment was diverted or siphoned off through salaries, consultation fees and rent for ulterior motives.The ED subsequently registered a money laundering case against NewsClick, Purkayastha and others, PTI reported. PPK Newsclick Studio sought the quashing of the FIR, arguing that it contained vague allegations. The High Court said the investment was an economic decision that "did not spell out any criminal offence". It noted that, according to the Union Ministry of Information and Broadcasting's reply to a letter from the news outlet, there was no cap or restriction on foreign direct investment in digital media at the relevant time.The court held that the investment followed acceptable practices and that the offences of cheating or criminal breach of trust were not established even if all the allegations were accepted.It said an offence of cheating required a person or entity that had been cheated, which in this case should have been Worldwide Media Holdings LLC. However, there was no complaint from the company, and the complaint had instead been made by "merely an informant".The court also noted that a digital print media company would incur expenses on salaries, consultation fees and rent. It therefore found the allegation of siphoning funds untenable.The High Court rejected the ED's attempt to continue the money laundering case on the basis of the offence of criminal conspiracy under the Indian Penal Code. It said the agency had to show the "illegal objective" or "means" adopted by NewsClick and others."Pertinently, extensive investigations were carried out by the ED for about a year and a half, and the petitioners as well as their employees have been summoned and examined many a times, but nothing incriminating till date has been found or placed on record," the court said, according to PTI."Aside from bald assertions of a criminal conspiracy, there is not a whisper of any incriminating allegation, which would even remotely suggest the commission of the offence punishable under Section 4 of the PMLA," it said."The FIR No. 0116/2020 and the ECIR bearing ECIR/14/HIU/2020 are, hereby, quashed," the court concluded. It also said that after the ECIR was quashed, the request for a copy of it no longer required consideration.The ED has now challenged that decision in the Supreme Court, maintaining that the High Court did not examine the money laundering case before quashing it. The appeal is awaiting listing.- Ends