A special court in Panchkula on Friday discharged former Haryana chief minister Bhupinder Singh Hooda and the Associated Journals Limited (AJL) in a money laundering case linked to re-allotment of a plot in Panchkula.

Special Judge Rajeev Goyal closed the Enforcement Directorate’s case as Hooda and the AJL, the publisher of National Herald, had already been discharged in the main case pursued by the CBI, the senior Congress leader’s counsel, SPS Parmar, told reporters.

“The court closed the ED case as the predicate had already been decided by the Punjab and Haryana High Court,” Parmar said. The HC on February 25 had set aside criminal charges against Hooda and the AJL in connection with the re-allotment of a plot in Panchkula.

Reacting to the order, Hooda told The Indian Express, “I have always maintained faith in the judiciary. These cases had no basis from the very beginning.”

Hooda had moved the special court in Panchkula seeking closure of the case on the ground that he had already been discharged in the original CBI case that gave rise to the money-laundering investigation by the ED under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA).

The case pertains to the allotment of an institutional plot in Sector 6, Panchkula, by the Haryana Urban Development Authority (HUDA), now known as the Haryana Shehri Vikas Pradhikaran, to the AJL in 1982. The plot was resumed in 1992 after construction was not completed within the stipulated period. AJL had filed appeal and revision petitions against the move, which were dismissed by the HUDA in 1995 and 1996.

In 2005, shortly after Hooda assumed office as chief minister, the plot was re-allotted to AJL at the original rates. Following a change of government in 2014, a vigilance inquiry led to the registration of an FIR, later handed over to the CBI. The agency alleged that the re-allotment was illegal, caused financial loss to the authority and conferred undue benefit on AJL.

In 2019, the ED filed a prosecution complaint against Hooda, Congress leader Motilal Vora and AJL under the PMLA. Vora passed away during the trial of the case in 2020.

According to ED, the property was allotted to AJL in 1982, but it was returned to HUDA in 1992 because AJL did not comply with the conditions of the allotment letter.

“The Resumption Order attained finality after dismissal of the Revision Petition in 1996. However, Bhupinder Singh Hooda, the then CM, Haryana/Chairman HUDA, blatantly misused his official position and dishonestly allotted the said plot afresh in the guise of re-allotment to the AJL at original rates plus interest in violation of the necessary conditions/ policy of HUDA vide order dated 28.08.2005,” ED stated in 2019 after filing a prosecution complaint.

The ED also alleged that Hooda did not adhere to the legal opinion of Legal Remembrance, Haryana, and to the recommendations of HUDA officers and the Financial Commissioner, Town and Country Planning (FCTCP).

“Thus, the CM caused wrongful loss to HUDA and wrongful gain to AJL,” ED alleged, adding, “Hooda further favoured the AJL by granting them three undue extensions for construction in the said plot from 01.05.2008 to 10.05.2012 until the AJL completed the construction in the year 2014.”

A Special CBI court framed charges in the case in 2021 under Sections 120-B and 420 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act, prompting Hooda and AJL to approach the HC.

In the high court, a bench of Justice Tribhuvan Dahiya set aside special CBI court order and ruled that all consequential proceedings stood quashed and the petitioners were discharged. The high court had held that the prosecution’s case rested entirely on the allegation that Hooda had abused his official position in 2005 to secure re-allotment of the plot to AJL in violation of statutory provisions. However, the court found no material to establish conspiracy, cheating, wrongful gain or wrongful loss. It held that there were no sufficient grounds to proceed against them.

“Continuation of prosecution will be an abuse of the process of the court. The impugned orders, dated 16.04.2021, framing charges against the petitioners as well as dismissing the discharge application, are hereby set aside along with all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom, and the petitioners stand discharged,” the high court order said.