Don’t miss the latest developments in business and finance.

Bihar cannot challenge Lalu's acquittal, rules SC

Image
BS Reporter New Delhi
Last Updated : Jan 21 2013 | 2:33 AM IST

Rashtriya Janata Dal (RJD) chief Lalu Prasad and his wife and former Bihar chief minister, Rabri Devi, got a major relief today when the Supreme Court held that the Bihar government did not have the authority to file an appeal in the Patna High Court against their acquittal by the CBI in a disproportionate assets case.

They were facing charges in the 1996 ‘fodder scam’ in which they had allegedly diverted funds from the state animal husbandry department, accumulating disproportionate assets to the tune of Rs 46 lakh.

A Bench headed by Chief Justice K G Balakrishnan allowed the appeals of Prasad and his wife that the Bihar government was not a competent authority to file an appeal in the case.

According to the Supreme Court judgment, written by Justice Lodha, it was the Centre and the CBI alone which are the competent authorities to file the appeal and the state government could not do it.

It may be recalled that Lalu Prasad was sent to the Bihar Military Police guest house on judicial remand in July 1997 and again in October 1998, while the fodder scam rocked his party and his family. Prasad had to step down from the chief minister’s post. He even had to spend a day in the Beur jail. However, the special court acquitted them of the charges in 2006.

The new state government challenged the acquittal in 2007, while the CBI did not. The couple then moved the Supreme Court against the Patna High Court taking up the matter.

More From This Section

The high court had held that the Bihar government’s appeal challenging their acquittal was maintainable.

However, the CBI questioned the move of the Nitish Kumar government and argued that it had no locus standi to file an appeal as the case was investigated by it and the state government cannot act contrary to the executive decision of the Centre.

Ram Jethmalani, counsel for Lalu Prasad, had argued that CBI was appointed to investigate cases at the discretion of the central government and therefore, the state had no role in prosecuting the case conducted by a central agency.

Also Read

First Published: Apr 02 2010 | 1:04 AM IST

Next Story