Delay in sanction halts CBI case proceedings

The lack of prosecution sanction against 32 public servants, including former Bihar chief minister Lalu Prasad, has held up the proceedings in land-for-jobs scam — which dates back to 2004-09 when Prasad was the railway minister — even after the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) filed a final charge sheet in the case around two months ago.

Irked by the inaction, a Delhi court in a strongly worded order last week directed the respective competent authorities to decide the sanction by August 20.

On June 7, CBI filed its final charge sheet — fourth since October 2022 — naming 78 accused, including Rashtriya Janata Dal (RJD) chief Lalu Prasad, his wife and former Bihar CM Rabri Devi, son Tej Pratap Yadav, daughter Hema Yadav, former aide Bhola Yadav, a former personal secretary, 29 railways officials, 37 candidates and six private persons.

The federal agency has invoked the Indian Penal Code (IPC) sections related to criminal conspiracy along with cheating and forgery among others, and provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act against the accused.

It is alleged in the case that appointment of substitutes in Group-D jobs were done in the railways during 2004-09, violating the recruitment norms and procedures of the Indian Railways. The candidates, directly or through their immediate family members, allegedly sold land to the family members of Lalu at discounted rates of up to one-fourth or one-fifth of prevailing market rates.

Taking a strong stance at delay in the proceedings in the case, special judge, CBI (MP/MLA case), Vishal Gogne on July 31 directed: “...the respective competent authorities shall decide the question of sanction by the next date of hearing (August 20) before this court failing which an authorised official from the office of the said competent authority shall appear before this court in order to explain the delay.”

People familiar with the development said the competent authority for Lalu’s sanction for prosecution is the Union home ministry while the ministry of railways has to clear prosecution sanction for 29 railway officials accused in the case.

For a court to take cognizance of a charge sheet against public servants, sanction under section 19 of Prevention of Corruption Act is mandatory. The law states that the concerned administrative ministries or departments must convey their decision on sanction within three months. Only in the cases where consultation is required from the attorney general or any law officer in the office of AG, an extension of one month is provided.

“This tendency of keeping CBI’s prosecution sanction requests pending hinders our anti-corruption work as the investigations are delayed, and as a result, trials in courts are held-up. This needs to be fast-tracked,” a CBI official said, requesting anonymity.

The federal agency’s action in corruption cases is already hit because of withdrawal of general consent under Section 6 of the Delhi Special Police Establishment (DSPE) Act by several state governments. The general consent withdrawal means CBI cannot suo motu operate in those states and it must send a request every time to the state to initiate a corruption probe.

Since 2018, West Bengal, Telangana, Punjab, Mizoram, Meghalaya, Kerala, Jharkhand and Tamil Nadu have withdrawn the general consent for CBI.