E-Paper
SC stays HC directive to Lokpal on sanction for CBI charge sheet against Mahua Moitra
Supreme Court stays Delhi HC order directing Lokpal to sanction CBI probe against TMC MP Mahua Moitra in alleged cash-for-query case.
The Supreme Court on Friday stayed a Delhi High Court order directing the Lokpal of India to grant sanction within two months to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) for filing a charge sheet against Trinamool Congress (TMC) parliamentarian Mahua Moitra for allegedly accepting money and favours to ask questions in Parliament.
The order was passed on a petition filed by the Lokpal of India challenging two orders of the HC — one on December 19, 2025, directing it to grant sanction within a month, followed by another order on January 23 extending this time by two months.
A bench of Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi said, “The order of the high court passed on January 23 shall remain stayed…Meanwhile Lokpal of India need not comply with paragraph 89 of the judgment of December 19 of the Delhi high court.”
“The Lokpal is requested to accord its consideration for grant of sanction under Section 20 of the Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act 2013, strictly in accordance with provisions thereof as construed hereinabove, within a period of one month from today,” the HC judgment said.
The Lokpal, represented by senior advocate Ranjit Kumar and advocate Nishant Katneshwarkar, said that its appeal only seeks to settle the law and the procedure and manner in which Lokpal should act. Kumar said, “We need an authoritative pronouncement to enable us know the procedure to be followed under the Lokpal Act 2013. We are not here for one or two individuals but on the interpretation of certain sections of the Act.”
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for CBI, informed the court that it supports the order of the High Court so far as the interpretation of the Act is concerned, as the respondent needs to be investigated.
Moitra was expelled from the Lok Sabha in December 2023 on an ethics panel’s recommendation for allegedly giving her official ID to Dubai-based businessman Darshan Hiranandani to post questions on the Lok Sabha portal. She is accused of receiving expensive gifts and funding for trips abroad in return. Hiranandani has corroborated the charges. Moitra, who was re-elected to the Lok Sabha in 2024, has denied them.
In October 2023, BJP MP Nishikant Dubey wrote to Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla based on a complaint by lawyer Jai Anant Dehadrai, who alleged that Moitra accepted money and favours to ask questions in Parliament. The same month, he approached Lokpal over the “cash-for-query” charge against Moitra.
Moitra was represented in the top court by senior advocate Nidhesh Gupta, while the complainant Dubey was not represented in court.
The bench noted that the interpretation of the Lokpal Act has come up before the court for the first time and issued notice to Moitra along with CBI and the complainant — BJP MP Nishikant Dubey, who complained against Moitra.
“Lokpal is an Act to ensure and insulate enquiry and institute cases against public servants in high positions where there is perceptible fear that they may disable investigation agencies from conducting a fair investigation,” the bench said.
The court admitted, “Apparently, the provisions for filing of charge sheet and conduct of prosecution overlap and the high court seems to have made a purposive interpretation of two provisions. Prima facie we agree, it is a wrong interpretation of section 20(7) and 20(8) of the Act.”
The petition by Lokpal said, “The high court has not considered the interplay between Section 12, 20, 23, 25 and 56 of the Lokpal Act in its proper perspective. The HC erred in arriving at a conclusion that sanction under Section (20)(7)(a) means the sanction for prosecution.”
It further said, “The HC judgment, if allowed to stand, will have far-reaching consequences. It will enable accused persons to stall corruption prosecutions at the threshold by inviting writ courts to conduct mini-trials at the first sanction stage, thereby frustrating the object of the Lokpal Act and eroding public confidence in anticorruption institutions.”
The Lokpal also questioned the HC judgment for not issuing any notice to it before passing the order and hearing only the CBI, which was the agency assigned by Lokpal to carry out the investigation.
On November 12, 2025, the Lokpal had granted CBI the sanction to file a charge sheet within four weeks and mandated that a copy be submitted to the Lokpal. This order was challenged by Moitra before the High Court.
The December 19 verdict set aside the Lokpal’s order, observing that the procedure adopted by it amounted to a form of statutory ingenuity or re-engineering of the 2013 Act and was “wholly alien to the scheme” of the Act. In March 2024, the Lokpal had ordered the CBI to file an FIR against her, saying there was “sufficient prima facie evidence on record that deserved deeper scrutiny.”
