What’s actually slowing this PC down?
Pick the symptom - the matching free tool is one click away.
On 23 January 2025, Special Judge Shailender Malik of the Rouse Avenue Court in New Delhi accepted the Central Bureau of Investigation’s closure report in a criminal case over a 2008–09 ICICI Bank loan transaction involving NDTV’s former promoters, Prannoy Roy and Radhika Roy, and RRPR Holding Pvt Ltd. The order records that no criminality, and no violation of Section 19(2) of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949, had been found against the accused in that case. It is a decision to close the CBI’s investigation, not a trial verdict, and it does not settle every dispute involving the Roys, NDTV or the related financing.
What the court actually decided
The court did not hear evidence or convict or acquit anyone. It reviewed the closure report, the annexed documents, and the submissions of the CBI’s public prosecutor. The operative reasoning appears in the order, as quoted in reporting:
“Upon going through the entire closure report, documents annexed with the same coupled with submissions made by ld. PP for CBI as well as statement given by the complainant to the effect that he is satisfied with the CBI investigation in the present case, this Court accepts the closure report filed by CBI as no criminality or violation of Section 19(2) of Banking Regulation Act, 1949 has been found by any of the accused persons.”
A shorter line from the same order reads: “Therefore, the closure report appears to be satisfactory and hence it is accepted.”
#1 Best Overall
The complainant’s statement matters to the outcome. He told the court he was satisfied with the CBI investigation and did not intend to file a protest petition, which is the route a complainant can take to challenge a closure report and seek further inquiry.
What a closure report is
A closure report is the investigating agency’s conclusion that the evidence does not justify putting the accused on trial. The court must still accept or reject it. Acceptance ends the criminal process in that case; it means the court agrees with the agency’s conclusion on the material before it. For that reason, the headline phrase “clearing” overstates what happened. No accused person was acquitted after a hearing on the merits, and the order should be read as a closure of this case alone.
Rank #2
The transaction under investigation
The case concerns allegations about a 2008–09 transaction involving ICICI Bank, Prannoy Roy, Radhika Roy and RRPR Holding Pvt Ltd. The CBI alleged a conspiracy with unknown bank officials and a violation of Section 19(2) of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949. Coverage describes the case as registered in 2017. These were allegations the agency investigated; they were never findings of guilt.
The loan and the collateral
According to the CBI’s account, as reported by The Indian Express in 2025, ICICI Bank advanced a ₹375 crore loan and took the former promoters’ 61% shareholding in NDTV as collateral. Reporting also described an alleged wilful loss to the bank of more than ₹48 crore. That loss figure is an allegation drawn from the CBI’s case, not a finding the court made.
The interest-rate reduction
The most contested element was the reduction in interest rates. The closure report, as described in the court document and in reporting, recounts a cut from 19% to 9.65%. The CBI’s position, as recorded in the report, was that this reduction was not evidence of collusion or conspiracy. It also said the reduction was not an isolated event: the bank had reduced interest rates on 83 loans between 2007 and 2010. These are the CBI’s findings and figures, not conclusions reached by the court.
Figures and how to attribute them
Each number below comes from the CBI’s account or its closure report as reported in 2025. None of them is a judicial finding.
| Figure | What it refers to | Attribution | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| ₹375 crore | Size of the ICICI Bank loan | CBI account, reported by The Indian Express (2025) | Allegation-based description of the transaction |
| 61% | NDTV shareholding taken as collateral | CBI account, reported by The Indian Express (2025) | Collateral description in the CBI’s account |
| More than ₹48 crore | Alleged wilful loss to ICICI Bank | Reporting of the CBI case (2025) | Allegation; not a court finding of loss |
| 19% to 9.65% | Interest-rate reduction on the loan | Closure report as reproduced in the court document | CBI’s reading, which it said did not show collusion |
| 83 loans | Loans with reduced interest rates, 2007–2010 | Closure report, reported by The Indian Express (2025) | CBI’s reasoning that the reduction was not isolated |
Key dates
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| 2007–2010 | Period in which the CBI says interest rates were reduced on 83 loans |
| 2008–09 | The loan transaction under investigation |
| 2017 | CBI case registration, as described in coverage |
| 23 January 2025 | Rouse Avenue Court accepts the closure report |
What the order does not establish
- It does not cover every related matter. The order concerns the criminal case the CBI investigated. It does not decide other disputes involving the Roys, NDTV, or the loan arrangements.
- Separate petitions were pending in 2025. A 2025 corporate disclosure referred to separate petitions concerning the loan and related proceedings as pending at that time. The reporting available for this article does not establish how those petitions were resolved afterwards, so readers should check current court records before assuming they have ended.
- Other regulators are not bound by it. A criminal closure report does not decide whether any regulatory body reached a different view on the same facts.
- The CBI’s figures remain the CBI’s. The ₹48 crore loss and the interest-rate analysis are the agency’s account, and the court accepted the report rather than adopting each number as its own finding.
How to describe the outcome accurately
The accurate description is that a special court accepted the CBI’s closure report in one criminal case concerning a 2008–09 ICICI Bank loan. The court recorded that no criminality or Section 19(2) violation had been found against the accused in that case. Describing it as a general clearance of the Roys or of NDTV, or as the end of all related proceedings, goes beyond what the order says.
Quick Recap
Best Value
- 104 Pages
- Includes 13 Songs from the Broadway Musical
- Composer: Alan Menken, Jack Feldman
- Softcover
- Dimensions: 12 x 9
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
