Patna/New Delhi, May 29: Former railway minister and RJD chief Lalu Prasad Yadav on Thursday petitioned the Delhi High Court seeking to quash the FIR filed by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) in the alleged land-for-jobs scam, arguing that the entire probe is illegal due to lack of mandatory prior sanction under anti-corruption laws.
Appearing for Prasad, senior advocate Kapil Sibal contended that the CBI failed to obtain the required sanction under Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act before launching any inquiry or investigation. “This is a jurisdictional defect. Without sanction under 17A, the investigation is void ab initio,” Sibal told Justice Ravinder Dudeja, who heard arguments and reserved the order.
Sibal also urged the court to stay the proceedings in the trial court, where arguments on the framing of charges are scheduled for June 2. “If charges are framed, what remedy do I have left? This FIR came 14 years after the alleged offence. There was even a closure report before. This is mala fide,” Sibal submitted.
The CBI had registered the case in May 2022, accusing Lalu Prasad of abusing his position as Union rail minister between 2004 and 2009 to facilitate Group-D appointments in exchange for land parcels gifted or transferred to his family or associates. The FIR also names his wife, two daughters, unidentified public servants and private individuals.
Sibal argued that Section 17A, introduced via amendment in 2018, acts as a safeguard against vexatious and politically motivated probes. “It provides a protective filter. In this atmosphere of regime revenge, this is precisely what 17A is intended to address,” he said, adding that prior investigations had already concluded with closure reports, making the reopening suspect.
Senior advocate D P Singh, representing the CBI, countered that the agency had obtained the necessary sanction under Section 19 of the Prevention of Corruption Act. “There is no bar to proceeding. Section 19 sanctions prosecution. The question of 17A is pending before a larger bench of the Supreme Court,” Singh said.
He emphasized that the allegations point to systemic misuse of office. “Selections were made at the instance of cronies and land was received in return. That is why it’s called the land-for-jobs case,” Singh said, opposing any stay on the trial.
When the court suggested that the legal argument around prior sanction could be raised before the trial court, Sibal responded, “Cognisance has already been taken. The trial court is unlikely to revisit that determination now.”
In his petition, Prasad has sought quashing of the FIR and three chargesheets filed in 2022, 2023, and 2024, as well as all consequential court orders. The plea claims the entire investigation is “non est” in law, a violation of his fundamental right to a fair process.
“The initiation of a fresh investigation without disclosure of earlier closure reports is an abuse of legal process,” the petition states. “It is a politically motivated probe conducted without legal authority. The absence of mandatory approval under Section 17A renders the entire investigation void.”
The High Court is expected to pass its order shortly.
