Delhi High Court Overturns Lokpal's Sanction for CBI Charges Against Mahua Moitra

The Delhi High Court has annulled a Lokpal order that permitted the CBI to file charges against Trinamool Congress MP Mahua Moitra in a cash-for-query scandal. The court found that the Lokpal misinterpreted the Lokpal Act, directing it to reassess the prosecution sanction. Moitra, who admitted to sharing her Parliament login details with a businessman, denied any wrongdoing. The case, initiated by allegations from a BJP MP and her former partner, has seen various legal proceedings, including a preliminary inquiry by the CBI. This ruling raises significant questions about the legal processes involved in such high-profile cases.

By Narendra Chaudhary Dec 19, 2025, 20:15 IST

Court Ruling on Lokpal's Sanction

On Friday, the Delhi High Court annulled a Lokpal order that allowed the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to file charges against Trinamool Congress MP Mahua Moitra related to a cash-for-query scandal.

A bench comprising Justices Anil Kshetarpal and Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar determined that the Lokpal had misinterpreted the Lokpal Act's provisions.

The court instructed the Lokpal to reassess the prosecution sanction in line with legal standards within a month.

The allegations against Moitra, who represents Krishnanagar in West Bengal, involve claims that she provided her Parliament login information to businessman Darshan Hiranandani and accepted gifts in return for posing questions in the Lok Sabha.

While Moitra acknowledged sharing her login details with Hiranandani, she firmly denied any receipt of cash or gifts.

The accusations against her emerged in October 2023, initiated by Bharatiya Janata Party MP Nishikant Dubey and advocate Jai Anant Dehadrai, who is also her former partner. Dubey lodged a complaint with the Lokpal, alleging that Moitra accepted bribes.

The Lokpal had previously instructed the CBI to conduct a preliminary investigation, which resulted in a report submitted in February 2024. Following this, the Lokpal mandated a deeper inquiry into the allegations against Moitra in March 2024.

This report was delivered to the Lokpal by the CBI in June, as reported by a major news outlet.

In August, the Lokpal requested Moitra to respond to the findings of the report.

On November 12, the Lokpal issued the sanction order after providing her with a chance to present her case.

Moitra contested the order that permitted the CBI to file charges, claiming it severely breached natural justice principles.

In her legal petition, she argued that her written and oral submissions were disregarded prior to the sanction being issued.

She also contended that the sanction order diminished the Lokpal's role to merely endorsing the investigation report.

Her attorney emphasized that according to Section 20(7) of the Lokpal Act, the ombudsman must consider the accused's comments before granting prosecution approval.

Conversely, the CBI, represented by Additional Solicitor General SV Raju, argued that Moitra was not entitled to an oral hearing, although she was afforded one. Raju noted that the law only necessitated the submission of comments by the accused.