$~

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgement reserved on: 21.11.2025

Judgement delivered on:19.12.2025

+ W.P.(C) 17495/2025, CM APPL. 72229/2025 (Stay) & CM

APPL. 72230/2025 (seeking permission to file confidential

documents in a sealed cover)

MAHUA MOITRA .....Petitioner

Through: Mr. Nidhesh Gupta, Senior

Advocate with Mr. Samudra Sarangi, Ms. Saloni Jain, Ms. Panya Gupta, Ms. Navya Nanda, Ms. Panchi Agarwal, Mr. Jimut Baran Mahapatra, Mr. Gur Simar Preet Singh, Mr.Bikram Dwivedi and Ms.

Virti Gujral, Advocates

versus

LOKPAL OF INDIA THROUGH CHAIRPERSON AND ORS

.....Respondents

Through: Mr. S. V. Raju, Additional

Solicitor General with Mr. Ripudaman Bhardwaj, SPP, Mr.Kushagra Kumar, Mr. Amit Kumar Rana, Advocates and ASP/IO Mr. Alok Singh for

R-2/CBI

Mr. Jeevesh Nagrath, Senior Advocate with Mr. Rishi Kumar Awasthi, Mr. Amit V. Awasthi, Mr. Piyush Vatsa, Ms. Ritu Arora, Mr. Avinash Ankit, Mr. Rahul Kumar Gupta, and Mr. Prabhakar Thakur,

Advocates for R-3

Mr. Ravi Prakash, Senior Advocate with Ms. Astu Khandelwal, Taha Yasin, Mr.

Yasharth Shukla, Mr. Ali Khan and Ms. Srutee Priyadarshini, Advocates for R-3 CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KSHETARPAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR

J U D G E M E N T

HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR, J.

1. This Writ Petition filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, Constitution challenges the Sanction Order dated 12.11.2025, Impugned Order, passed in Complaint No. 201/2023 by the learned Lokpal of India, Lokpal, whereby sanction was granted for filing a charge- sheet before the competent court under Section 20(7)(a) read with Section 23(1) of the Lokpal and Lokayukta Act, 2013, Act against the Petitioner/Respondent Public Servant, RPS. The Petitioner further seeks a writ of Mandamus restraining Respondent No. 2, the Central Bureau of Investigation, CBI, from taking any further steps pursuant to the said Sanction Order.

2. With the consent of the parties, the matter was taken up for final hearing, and by way of this judgment, the Court now proceeds to adjudicate the petition finally.

BRIEF FACTS:

3. This Petition arises from proceedings initiated before the learned Lokpal pursuant to a complaint filed by a Member of Parliament, alleging misconduct and acts of corruption on the part of the Petitioner, who is also a sitting Member of Parliament.

4. The complaint relied on a letter dated 14.10.2023 received by the Complainant from Shri Jai Anant Dehadrai, Advocate, setting out the following allegations:

(i) That the RPS allegedly shared her Lok Sabha ―Member Portal‖

login credentials with one Shri Darshan Hiranandani, DHN, a businessman based in Dubai, enabling him to access the portal and post Parliamentary Questions in her name;

(ii) That the RPS allegedly received Rs. 2 crores in Indian and foreign currency from DHN in lieu of asking Parliamentary Questions furthering his business interests, and had also allegedly received Rs. 75 lakhs, prior to the 2019 Lok Sabha elections;

(iii) That of the 61 questions asked by the RPS, approximately 50 allegedly pertained to the business interests of DHN;

(iv) That the RPS allegedly demanded and accepted various gifts, luxury items, travel expenses, holidays, and logistical assistance for domestic and foreign travel from DHN; and (v) That the RPS sought and received assistance from DHN in the renovation of her officially allotted bungalow at New Delhi, including architectural drawings prepared by the in-house team of his company, allegedly in violation of CPWD, Central Public Works Department norms.

5. The complaint was considered by the Full Bench of the Lokpal on 08.11.2023, which referred the matter to the CBI for a Preliminary Inquiry under Section 20(1)(a) read with Section 20(2) of the Lokpal Act. The CBI was directed to submit its report by 22.12.2023.

6. On 22.12.2023, the CBI sought an extension of three months.

The learned Lokpal granted an extension only until 15.02.2024.

7. The CBI submitted its Preliminary Inquiry Report, PI Report. dat