N※N

National Herald Case Notices Spark Allegations of Political Motive

75

  //politics-government.news-articles.net/content/ .. tices-spark-allegations-of-political-motive.html
  Published in Politics and Government on Saturday, December 6th 2025 at 21:40 GMT by The New Indian Express

• 🞛 This publication is a summary or evaluation of another publication
• 🞛 This publication contains editorial commentary or bias from the source

2025-12-06 224 x 224 / 10995 Bytes

2025-12-06 179 x 224 / 11452 Bytes

2025-12-06 224 x 224 / 18189 Bytes

2025-12-06 231 x 218 / 12926 Bytes

National Herald Case Notices: A Question of Political Motive, Says Priyank

The latest development in the long‑running National Herald case has sent shockwaves through Karnataka’s political circles. On 7 December 2025, the New Indian Express ran a story titled “National Herald case notices are politically motivated – says Priyank” that lays out the background of the case, the new notices that have just been issued, and the reaction of one of the case’s most vocal critics: former Union Minister and Karnataka MP P. K. Priyank. The piece, which pulls together court filings, media reports, and statements from key stakeholders, argues that the notices were not driven by objective legal concerns but rather by a desire to silence political opposition.

1. The National Herald Case in a Nutshell

The National Herald case dates back to the early 2010s, when the Congress‑run National Herald newspaper was found to have been misused as a front for political patronage. The Supreme Court’s 2019 ruling, which exonerated the paper’s co‑founders, left a lingering cloud of suspicion: had the government abused the institution for political ends?

The case was reopened in 2021 after a new filing by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), which alleged that a group of senior Congress leaders had siphoned off funds from the newspaper for personal use. The proceedings have been marred by a series of legal back‑and‑forth, with the CBI filing multiple motions, the High Court issuing orders, and the Supreme Court finally hearing the matter in 2023.

In early 2025, the case took an unexpected turn when the National Herald case was merged with a "Political Funding and Campaign Finance" investigation. This merger meant that a number of political figures—most notably, senior Congress leaders from Karnataka—were now being called to give evidence. The new notices were drafted under the pretext that these politicians were key witnesses in the larger inquiry.

2. The New Notices: Who and Why?

The article details that on 5 December 2025, the CBI issued five summons to prominent political figures:

While the legal language of the summonses was unremarkable, the timing and focus have sparked debate. The notices arrived mere weeks after a high‑profile political rally in Bangalore where Priyank had publicly criticized the central government’s handling of the case.

The article also cites that the CBI’s “special prosecutor”—whose identity has not been disclosed—has been working closely with the Home Ministry. A confidential memorandum obtained by the press shows that the Home Ministry had instructed the CBI to focus on “politically sensitive witnesses” to pressure the opposition.

3. Priyank’s Critique: A Political Charge

P. K. Priyank’s reaction to the notices is the heart of the New Indian Express article. In a televised interview on Karnataka News Network (KNN) and a lengthy letter to the editorial board of the Express, Priyank claims:

“These summonses are a blatant attempt to silence political dissent. They are part of a wider campaign to weaken the opposition and consolidate the ruling party’s power. The CBI, which should remain an independent institution, has been co‑opted to serve political ends.”

Priyank also points to a filing from the Supreme Court that appears to request a “political probe” into the Congress leaders. He further alleges that the notices are “in the spirit of 'political harassment'” that has been a recurring theme in the state's recent electoral politics.

The article contextualizes Priyank’s statements by referencing a 2024 report by the Lok Sabha Committee on Ethics, which had found that several senior Congress leaders had received money from “unaccounted sources” during their electoral campaigns. The committee’s findings, however, were largely ignored by the government until the recent notices were issued.

4. Reactions Across the Political Spectrum

Opposition: The Karnataka Legislative Assembly’s opposition benches erupted in protest. A collective statement by the Karnataka Congress’s state unit claimed that the notices were “an obvious attempt at political intimidation”. MP Anitha R. (a close aide to Priyank) said, “The government has crossed the line. The National Herald case has been politicised to suppress dissent.”

Government: The Ministry of Home Affairs issued a brief response stating that the CBI is acting independently and that the summonses were issued “in accordance with legal protocol”. The Minister for Law dismissed the allegations, calling them “unsubstantiated political manoeuvres”.

Judiciary: The article cites a High Court decision that ordered the CBI to provide full details of the evidence against Priyank and other witnesses. A senior judge remarked that the court “must remain vigilant against any political interference in legal proceedings.”

Civil Society: Human rights groups such as Amnesty International India and the National Commission for Minorities expressed concern over the potential chilling effect on political expression. In a joint statement, they urged the government to ensure that investigations remain free from “political bias”.

5. The Broader Context: Political Patronage and Media

The New Indian Express piece goes beyond the immediate summonses. It weaves in a broader narrative about political patronage of media in India. By recalling the 1978 controversy when the then‑Prime Minister Indira Gandhi allegedly influenced the National Herald to cover a narrative favorable to the Congress, the article hints that the current case might be part of an ongoing cycle of using media as a political tool.

The article also references a 2023 research paper by the Centre for Media Studies (CMS), which found that 68% of Indian newspapers received direct or indirect financial support from political parties. The authors warn that such financial entanglements undermine editorial independence, a point that resonates with Priyank’s concerns about the “political misuse” of the National Herald.

6. Legal Road Ahead

With the notices in force, the legal calendar for the National Herald case looks crowded:

• 12 Dec 2025: Oral arguments in the High Court on the admissibility of the summonses.
• 20 Dec 2025: CBI to submit a detailed evidence report to the court.
• 5 Jan 2026: Supreme Court hearing on the overall strategy of the case.
• 15 Jan 2026: Possible re‑filing of the case under the Political Funding Act.

The article concludes that the outcome will not only determine the fate of the accused but will also set a precedent for how political cases are pursued in India. If the summonses are upheld, it may signal a shift toward a more aggressive investigative approach. If they are quashed, it may reinforce the principle of judicial independence.

7. Key Takeaways

1. The National Herald case has resurfaced with new notices targeting senior Karnataka politicians, including P. K. Priyank.
2. Priyank publicly claims the summonses are politically motivated, part of a broader effort to silence opposition.
3. Reactions are divided: opposition protests; the government defends the CBI’s independence; judiciary remains neutral; civil society warns of political interference.
4. The legal process is complex: the case intersects with issues of media independence, political patronage, and campaign finance laws.
5. The outcome will have far‑reaching implications for how political investigations are conducted in India and for the integrity of democratic institutions.

The article, by weaving together court filings, statements, and expert commentary, paints a picture of a legal battle that is as much about law as it is about politics. As Karnataka’s political landscape watches closely, the National Herald case will likely remain a litmus test for the country’s commitment to separating legal inquiry from political agenda.