A hearing took place in the Delhi High Court on September 8th regarding the ‘Land for Jobs’ case involving former Railway Minister Lalu Prasad Yadav. Yadav’s legal team presented arguments to the court, requesting that the CBI FIR be dismissed. Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, representing Yadav, argued that the FIR was filed without the mandatory approvals required under the law. Sibal specifically pointed out to Justice Ravinder Dudeja that the PC Act requires prior permission for such FIRs, which was not obtained. He stated that the CBI had proceeded without the requisite authorization.
Sibal argued that the entire investigation was unlawful and could not have commenced without the required permissions. He further emphasized that approval was necessary due to Yadav’s position as Railway Minister at the time. He clarified that their primary objective was to have the FIR quashed, thereby halting the investigation. Explaining the accusations, Sibal told the court that Yadav, as Railway Minister, was alleged to have offered Group D jobs in exchange for land. Furthermore, it was alleged that he pressured railway officials to appoint candidates using fraudulent documentation. Yadav’s defense is that he made no personal recommendations. If any actions took place, it was the officers of Indian Railways who were responsible. If he did not put any pressure, then why is he being prosecuted? They are unable to give reasons on why the permission was required from officers, they claim they were very careful and the cognizance will be taken at a later stage.
Kapil Sibal also highlighted that because Lalu Yadav was acting in his official capacity as Railway Minister, approval was required. The legal challenge centers on the lack of necessary approvals. They maintain that the FIR and any subsequent investigation are invalid without proper authorization. Sibal stated that the primary concern is the cancellation of the RC (Regular Case). The act of filing an FIR and initiating an investigation without approval is deemed invalid. Yadav’s legal team believes the CBI’s FIR lacks sufficient grounds and should therefore be annulled.
After hearing the arguments, the court clarified that the issue of missing approvals would primarily impact offenses under the PC Act, not under the IPC. The next hearing in this case is set for September 25th.
