New Delhi, Jan 13 (PTI) Opposing Lalu Prasad Yadav’s petition to quash its FIR in the land-for-jobs scam case, the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) on Tuesday said the decisions made by RJD supremo on appointments in Railways did not fall under the discharge of his public duties as railway minister, and only the general managers could make such decisions.
Solicitor General S V Raju, appearing for the CBI, submitted this before Justice Ravinder Dudeja to argue that there was no need to obtain prior sanction under section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act to proceed against Lalu as his conduct could not be said to be within the ambit of “discharge of his official functions or duties”. “Our case is, in discharge of his official duties or functions, he (Lalu) was not required to make any recommendation or take a decision. Therefore, whatever decision or recommendation is made, it was not in discharge of his official duties. The recommendation or decision could only be taken by the general managers. Minister had no role,” Raju submitted.
“Therefore, in (matters of) appointment, taking the decision to appoint, the railway minister had no role. It was not relatable to the discharge of his public duties as a railway minister. So, Lalu had no role,” he added.
Senior advocate D P Singh, additional solicitor general, who appeared for the CBI, informed that the sanction under section 17A for proceeding against the concerned general managers was duly taken.
Justice Dudeja listed the case for further hearing next week.
The ‘land-for-jobs’ case is related to Group D appointments made in the West Central Zone of the Indian Railways based in Jabalpur, Madhya Pradesh, during Lalu Prasad’s tenure as the rail minister between 2004 and 2009 in return for land parcels gifted or transferred by the recruits in the name of the RJD supremo’s family or associates, officials said.
The case was registered on May 18, 2022, against Lalu Prasad and others, including his wife, two daughters, unidentified public officials and private persons.
In his petition in the high court, Lalu has sought quashing of the FIR as well as the three chargesheets filed in 2022, 2023 and 2024 and the consequential orders of cognisance.
Senior advocate Kapil Sibal has earlier argued on behalf of Lalu Prasad that the enquiry and the FIR, as well as the investigation and subsequent chargesheets in the matter, could not be legally sustained as the investigating agency failed to obtain prior sanction under section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act.
The petition also said that the FIR was lodged in 2022 — almost after a delay of 14 years — despite the CBI’s initial enquiries and investigations being closed after filing of the closure report before the competent court.
“Initiation of the fresh investigation in concealment of the previous investigations and its closure reports is nothing but an abuse of the process of law. The Petitioner is being made to suffer through an illegal, motivated investigation, in clear violation of his fundamental right to fair investigation,” said the petition.
Both the initiation of the present enquiries and investigations are non est as both have been initiated without a mandatory approval under Section 17A of the PC Act, it said.
“Without such approval, any enquiry/inquiry/investigation undertaken would be void ab initio. Section 17A of the PC Act provides a filter from vexatious litigation. The present scenario of regime revenge and political vendetta is exactly what Section 17A seeks to restrict by protecting innocent persons.
“The initiation of investigation without such approval vitiates the entire proceedings since inception, and the same is a jurisdictional error,” it said. PTI ADS RHL
This report is auto-generated from PTI news service. ThePrint holds no responsibility for its content.