‘Futile to continue with this LOC,’ Delhi HC judge says as CBI defends lookout circulars for ex-NDTV promoters Prannoy and Radhika Roy
The CBI argues the lookout circulars are meant to 'keep a watch' on Prannoy and Radhika Roy as they 'can go and never come back' because they don't own NDTV now.
The Central Bureau of Investigation on Thursday said in the Delhi High Court that it had kept its lookout circulars for former NDTV promoters Prannoy Roy and Radhika Roy open “to keep a watch on (their) movements”, even as Justice Sachin Datta orally remarked that “it is futile to continue with this LOC (lookout circular)”.
The Roys are seeking the quashing of the lookout circulars issued after the CBI registered cases against them in 2017 and 2019.
Senior advocate Manu Sharma, appearing for the Roys, submitted four grounds for their prayer.
“First is cooperation – which is indicated. On August 19, 2019, CBI registered this case as a regular case. Before that, this case had the character of a preliminary enquiry (PE). In January and February 2019 we were summoned, we answered the summon and in August 2019 the regular case was registered. We are in May 2025 and I’ve not been called in the last five years… For five years they’ve never felt the need to call me. So my cooperation is not an issue,” Sharma said.
Sharma added that the prolonged nature of investigation too was a factor to be seen. “If investigation goes on for years and years without any end in sight and if I answer summons, it weighs positively,” he said.
Sharma further said the principal guideline for issuing lookout circulars is that there should be evidence of the evasion of a summons. “None of that existed in the case and yet this LOC was opened. So that (the guideline) was breached in this case,” he argued.
It was also pointed out the Roys had travelled and come back on eight occasions in the past after they were permitted to travel by the court.
The CBI counsel, however, argued that these parameters were for a “normal case” and would not apply to Roys’ case.
“Thirty-two sham companies were opened in tax havens, money was transacted through sham transactions…that is why we have to keep a watch on his movements,” the CBI counsel said.
The CBI further said “this has international ramification”, adding that lookout circulars have been issued not to ensure the Roys’ cooperation but rather to keep a watch on them.
Justice Datta, however, orally observed, “There is a provision to downgrade a LOC… Actually, there is nothing left in this matter, it is futile to continue with this LOC.”
Story continues below this ad
As the CBI counsel stated, “This has international ramifications. We do not need his cooperation,” Justice Datta enquired, “Why have you opened an LOC?”
The CBI counsel reiterated in response, “To keep a watch on his movement…Now he doesn’t have NDTV also with him, so he can go and never come back, so we have to keep a watch on him.”
Justice Datta suggested that for the same, CBI “can ask immigration authorities to give information.”
The court will hear further arguments in the matter on July 10.
Story continues below this ad
The 2017 CBI case accused Roys, a private company, and others of causing losses to ICICI Bank with the default of a Rs 48-crore loan taken by Roy in 2009 for a company named RRPR Holdings Private Limited.
The Enforcement Directorate also registered a case against the Roys in the matter later. In October 2024, the CBI closed this case due to a lack of evidence.
In the 2019 CBI case, the Roys and others are accused of money laundering as NDTV allegedly “floated” around 32 subsidiary firms in the Netherlands, the UK, Dubai, Malaysia, and Mauritius between 2004 and 2010. According to the CBI, these were “sham transactions” meant only “to bring funds from abroad”.
The CBI alleges that the funds were “invested by unknown public servants through NDTV Ltd and later laundered back to India through multiple layers of complex transactions and shell companies.”
Story continues below this ad
However, no chargesheet has been filed in the case to date.
Sohini Ghosh is a Senior Correspondent at The Indian Express. Previously based in Ahmedabad covering Gujarat, she recently moved to the New Delhi bureau, where she primarily covers legal developments at the Delhi High Court
Professional Profile
Background: An alumna of the Asian College of Journalism (ACJ), she previously worked with ET NOW before joining The Indian Express.
Core Beats: Her reporting is currently centered on the Delhi High Court, with a focus on high-profile constitutional disputes, disputes over intellectual property, criminal and civil cases, issues of human rights and regulatory law (especially in the areas of technology and healthcare).
Earlier Specialty: In Gujarat, she was known for her rigorous coverage in the beats of crime, law and policy, and social justice issues, including the 2002 riot cases, 2008 serial bomb blast case, 2016 flogging of Dalits in Una, among others.
She has extensively covered health in the state, including being part of the team that revealed the segregation of wards at the state’s largest government hospital on lines of faith in April 2020.
With Ahmedabad being a UNESCO heritage city, she has widely covered urban development and heritage issues, including the redevelopment of the Sabarmati Ashram
Recent Notable Articles (Late 2025)
Her recent reporting from the Delhi High Court covers major political, constitutional, corporate, and public-interest legal battles:
High-Profile Case Coverage
She has extensively covered the various legal battles - including for compensation under the aegis of North East Delhi Riots Claims Commission - pertaining to the 2020 northeast Delhi riots, as well as 1984 anti-Sikh riots.
She has also led coverage at the intersection of technology and governance, and its impact on the citizenry, from, and beyond courtrooms — such as the government’s stakeholder consultations for framing AI-Deepfake policy.
Signature Style
Sohini is recognized for her sustained reporting from courtrooms and beyond. She specialises in breaking down dense legal arguments to make legalese accessible for readers. Her transition from Gujarat to Delhi has seen her expand her coverage on regulatory, corporate and intellectual property law, while maintaining a strong commitment to human rights and lacuna in the criminal justice system.
X (Twitter): @thanda_ghosh ... Read More
