The Supreme Court declined to stop the CBI case against Lalu Prasad Yadav, allowing the trial to proceed without delay. The court said issues like sanction can be raised during trial, not before.
The Supreme Court of India on Monday refused to entertain a plea filed by Lalu Prasad Yadav seeking to quash the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) case in the alleged land-for-jobs scam. The court clarified that objections related to sanction can be raised during the trial and should not delay the proceedings.
A bench comprising Justices MM Sundresh and N Kotiswar Singh stated that it was not the right stage to interfere in the matter. The court allowed Yadav to raise his legal objections before the trial court at the appropriate time. In its order, the bench said,
“Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances, liberty is granted to the petitioner to raise the legal issue at the time of the trial.”
ALSO READ: Land-for-Jobs Case: Lalu Prasad Yadav Moves Delhi High Court Challenging Criminal Charges
The court also made it clear that such legal questions cannot be used to slow down or stop the trial process. It emphasized that the proceedings must continue without unnecessary delays.
The case mainly revolves around the interpretation of Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act. This provision requires prior government approval before investigating decisions taken by a public servant in the course of official duties. The Supreme Court noted two key issues in the matter — the scope and applicability of Section 17A, and whether it applies retrospectively. However, the bench chose not to decide these questions at this stage and left them open for consideration during trial.
Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for Yadav, argued that the lack of prior sanction invalidates the entire investigation. He submitted that the allegations, which involve influencing railway job appointments, are directly connected to Yadav’s role as the Railway Minister, and therefore should be protected under Section 17A.
Sibal also referred to the Delhi High Court’s view that Section 17A is prospective, but argued that the issue should still be examined at the initial stage since it affects the legality of the investigation itself.
On the other hand, Additional Solicitor General SV Raju opposed the plea, stating that prior sanction was not required in this case. He argued that Yadav was neither the decision-making authority nor the recommending authority in the alleged transactions. Raju also pointed out that the plea was filed too late, long after the investigation had been completed.
The Supreme Court observed that questions about whether influence was exercised formally or informally can be properly examined during the trial. This indicates that such factual issues are better suited for trial proceedings rather than preliminary intervention. At the same time, the court granted Yadav exemption from personal appearance in the case.
ALSO READ: Tej Pratap, Hema Yadav, and Others Granted Bail in Land-for-Job Scam Case
This order comes shortly after the Delhi High Court dismissed Yadav’s plea to quash the case. The High Court had ruled that Section 17A, introduced in 2018, does not apply retrospectively to alleged offences committed between 2004 and 2009. It also held that the protection under Section 17A would not apply because the alleged acts were not linked to any official decision or recommendation made by Yadav in his official capacity.
The CBI case relates to alleged irregular appointments made in the Indian Railways during Yadav’s tenure as Union Railway Minister from 2004 to 2009. According to the investigating agency, Group-D jobs were allegedly given in exchange for land parcels transferred to Yadav’s family members or close associates.
The CBI registered the case in May 2022 against Yadav and several others, including his family members. A trial court has already framed charges of corruption and criminal conspiracy in the matter, observing that public employment was allegedly used as a “bargaining chip” to acquire land.
Earlier, on January 9, a Delhi court framed charges against Yadav, his wife Rabri Devi, and their children, including Tejashwi Yadav, Tej Pratap Yadav, and Misa Bharti. The court observed that Yadav allegedly used the railway ministry as his “personal fiefdom” to carry out a criminal enterprise during his tenure.
The trial court further noted that the chargesheet revealed a larger conspiracy where public jobs were used as a “bargaining chip” to obtain land in the names of Yadav’s family members.
With the Supreme Court refusing to intervene at this stage, the trial will now continue. Yadav is expected to raise his legal objections, including the issue of sanction, before the trial court during the course of the proceedings.
Click Here to Read More Reports On Land-for-Jobs Case
