CBI allowed to argue on framing of charges against Lalu Prasad, Tejashwi Yadav

The Delhi High Court has vacated its virtual stay on the trial in the IRCTC hotels scandal involving former railway minister Lalu Prasad, his wife Rabri Devi, Bihar deputy chief minister Tejashwi Yadav and 11 others.

The high court has given the go ahead to the Central Bureau of Investigation to start arguments on framing of charges against the accused in the trial court. However, in its order earlier this month, the high court clarified that the lower court's order on the framing of charges would be subject to the outcome of a petition filed by a co-accused in the case and pending before it.
A special CBI court had in July 2018 taken cognisance of a charge sheet filed by the CBI against Lalu Prasad and the other co-accused. But arguments have not commenced yet on framing of charges.In February 2019, a co-accused petitioned the Delhi High Court challenging the special court's decision to take cognisance of the charge sheet.

He claimed that the CBI did not seek his prosecution sanction, which was necessary since he was a government servant when the alleged offence was committed.

Taking note, the high court exempted the co-accused, Vinod Kumar Asthana, from appearance before the trial court. Two other co-accused, who were also former government servants, filed similar applications before the trial court.

These developments brought the trial to a virtual halt and no arguments on framing of charges had happened till date. With the latest order from the Delhi High Court, the CBI is now expected to press for framing of charges against Prasad and the other co-accused.

ET was the first to report on August 16 that the CBI had requested the high court to decide on Asthana's petition and let the trial court hear the arguments.

The agency had also argued that the high court could impose a condition that the outcome of framing of charges would be subject to the outcome of Asthana's petition. This request was granted by the high court. "In the meanwhile, the arguments on charge may be started by the respondent (CBI) but the order on charge shall be subject to the outcome of this petition", the high court ruled.

ET has seen the copy of the short order. The CBI had registered the case against Prasad and others in July 2017. After almost a year-long investigation, the agency filed its charge sheet in April 2018. In compliance with the Delhi High Court's order dated February 2019, the CBI in March 2020 filed a status report in response to Asthana's petition.

The CBI, in its status report, said it had sought prosecution sanction against one accused in July 2018. The status report, seen by ET, said Prasad, the then railways minister, and four other public servants were "also found abusing their official position, but at the time of filing of charge sheet they were not in service, hence, sanction for their prosecution was not necessary under the provisions of the then Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988".

Countering this, the co-accused have contended that the amendments brought to the Act in 2018 mandated that prosecution sanction be sought against retired government servants as well.

On Rabri Devi, Tejashwi Yadav and the other accused, CBI's status report said their alleged involvement had been in their individual capacities and hence sanction for their prosecution was not considered necessary. The CBI had sought legal opinion from the attorney general in March 2020 to support its stand that no prosecution sanction was required against the accused.

The agency said that although there was no requirement to seek the sanction, yet to ensure that the trial was not delayed on this ground, the competent authority granted sanction against Asthana and other public servants involved in the case in June 2020.