Full Breakdown
Enforcement Directorate Appeals to Supreme Court Over Quashed FIR and Money-Laundering Probe Against NewsClick
By Drooid · · How we work
Core Event
The Enforcement Directorate (ED) has filed a Special Leave Petition in the Supreme Court seeking to set aside the Delhi High Court’s May 29 2026 judgment that quashed the Economic Offences Wing (EOW) FIR (No. 0116/2020) and the related Enforcement Case Information Report (ECIR) under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA). The High Court held that the FIR did not disclose cheating, criminal breach of trust, or conspiracy, and therefore the ECIR should be closed. The ED argues the court exceeded its jurisdiction by deciding disputed factual issues at the writ stage and overlooking material evidence.
Background & Context
The dispute stems from a 2020 FIR filed by the Delhi Police’s Economic Offences Wing, alleging that PPK Newsclick Studio Pvt Ltd—owner of NewsClick—received foreign direct investment (FDI) from U.S. entity Worldwide Media Holdings LLC in 2018-19. The FIR claimed the Rs 9.59 crore (? $1.5 million) investment was made through an inflated share-valuation to bypass the 26 percent cap on foreign funding for digital news sites, and that over 45 percent of the funds were diverted as salaries, consultancy fees, rent and other expenses. The ED later registered a money-laundering case under the PMLA.
Timeline
- 2020 – EOW registers FIR No. 0116/2020.
- July 7 2021 – Delhi High Court grants Prabir Purkayastha interim protection from arrest.
- July 23 2025 – Anticipatory bail granted in two cases, one by the ED and one by the EOW.
- December 3 2025 – High Court reserves judgment.
- October 24 2026 – ED files Special Leave Petition in the Supreme Court.
Data & Statistics
- FDI amount: Rs 9.59 crore (? $1.5 million).
- Share-valuation claim: Alleged overvaluation allowed a 7.69 percent stake, exceeding the 26 percent cap.
- Alleged diversion: More than 45 percent of the investment used for salaries, consultancy fees, rent, etc.
- Legal provisions: IPC Sections 406, 420, 120B; ECIR filed under the PMLA.
Official Statements & Responses
- Delhi High Court (Justice Neena Bansal Krishna): Found the FIR did not establish cheating because the alleged “aggrieved” party, Worldwide Media Holdings LLC, had not filed a complaint, and deemed the transaction a commercial share purchase. Consequently, the FIR and ECIR were quashed.
- Enforcement Directorate: Says the High Court “overlooked critical evidence” and conducted a “mini-trial” by assessing factual disputes without a full trial. The agency points to the overvalued share price, fund diversion, and false representations to banks as bases for the charges, and cites a five-month delay between reserving judgment (Dec 3 2025) and pronouncing it (May 29 2026) as a procedural flaw.
Criticism & Opposition
Legal commentators and the ED criticize the High Court’s approach, arguing that courts should not resolve factual disputes at the writ stage. The ED also claims the court ignored emails and statements that demonstrate pre-planned funding arrangements.
Conflicting Reports & Gaps
- Investment amount: Most reports list Rs 9.59 crore; one source records Rs 9.60 crore.
- Additional alleged funds: An ANI report mentions an extra Rs 92 crore from entities linked to Neville Roy Singham and a separate Rs 184 crore penalty under FEMA in February 2026, but these figures lack corroboration.
- Scope of investigations: Some sources note separate FIRs under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act and the Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act, without further detail.