The Supreme Court declined to dismiss the CBI FIR and charge sheets against RJD chief Lalu Prasad Yadav related to an alleged land-for-jobs scam. Despite this, the court allowed Yadav to raise legal objections during the trial and exempted him from personal appearance before the trial court. The bench, led by Justices M.M. Sundresh and N. Kotiswar Singh, did not express a view on the applicability of Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act.
The apex court clarified that it was not taking a stance on the issue of whether the provision is prospective or retrospective. It granted Yadav the freedom to raise this matter during the trial proceedings. Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, representing Yadav, argued that prior sanction under Section 17A was mandatory before initiating the investigation. On the other hand, Additional Solicitor General S.V. Raju contended that this section applies only to decision-making or recommending authorities.
During the hearing, the bench expressed concerns about the influence exerted by a person in a high office, even if no formal recommendation was recorded. However, the court refrained from making a judgment on the merits of the arguments and left the matter to be decided during the trial. This development follows the Delhi High Court’s dismissal of Yadav’s petition to quash the FIR, charge sheets, and cognisance orders, citing lack of merit.
