'Don't put cart before horse': Court rejects Lalu's plea seeking unrelied documents for trial

New Delhi: A Delhi court has rejected the pleas of former railway minister Lalu Prasad Yadav and his wife Rabri Devi seeking over 1,600 unrelied documents to prepare their defence in the land-for-jobs case trial, saying they were designed to "condemn the trial to a maze at the very outset." Special judge Vishal Gogne underlined that providing these documents en bloc would not only "place the cart before the horse" but also throw the judicial process into "complete disarray". He also dismissed the applications of two other accused -- personal secretary (PS) of Lalu Prasad, R K Mahajan, seeking one unrelied document, and a former appointing authority, ex-general manager of railways, Maheep Kapoor, seeking 23 unrelied documents. Unrelied documents are materials seized by investigating agencies but not relied on in the prosecution complaint.

The land-for-jobs case relates to Group D appointments made in the West Central Zone of the Indian Railways in Jabalpur, Madhya Pradesh, during Lalu Prasad's tenure as the railway minister between 2004 and 2009, in return for land parcels gifted or transferred by the recruits in the names of the RJD supremo's family or associates, according to the CBI. The case was registered on May 18, 2022, against Lalu Prasad and others, including his wife, two daughters, unidentified public officials and private persons. In a scathing 35-page order passed on Wednesday, Judge Gogne stated that the court's statutory control over the trial could not be "appropriated by the accused under the veneer of cross-examination" and that there seemed to be a "latent intent" by the applicants to drag proceedings. The court said it needed to conduct the recording of evidence in consonance with statutory provisions to ensure the right to a fair trial and expeditious conclusion of proceedings. The court said the accused were asking that all or some unrelied documents be provided before they could even contemplate the preparation of defence, meaning that the supply of unrelied documents was being projected as a condition for the initiation of cross-examination.

It said, "While the preparation of cross-examination does certainly entail projection of a defence (by way of questions or suggestions), such exercise cannot be held in abeyance upon the self-serving prayer of the accused that they shall be hampered in preparing for cross-examination till they have the unrelied documents in their possession." Underlining that the pleas were "untenable", the court said that the accused "cannot be permitted to create a conditionality upon the continuation of judicial proceedings." It said various judicial precedents did not mandate providing the documents, as a matter of entitlement or right to the accused. They could not claim prejudice to their defence in the absence of these at the commencement of the trial, the court added. The court noted that the accused had been previously granted an adequate opportunity to inspect the documents, which were part of the unrelied basket of evidence. The court said it does not find the accused to be "flailing in the dark", as they are called upon to prepare for cross-examination of prosecution witnesses. According to the law, the trial had to be conducted first on the evidence cited by the prosecution, which included documents relied upon, it said. The court said, "If the contentions of the accused are accepted, the framework of trial, as recognised in the Code of Criminal Procedure (now the BNSS), would transform from a relied upon (documents) template to an unrelied upon (documents) scenario." "The latent intent or at least effect of an en bloc provision of unrelied documents to the accused would not only place the cart before the horse but also throw the trial proceedings into complete disarray," the court added. The court highlighted that providing unrelied upon documents was "a sparing discretion" to be exercised by it at the appropriate stage of proceedings and that such discretion would be governed by the necessity and desirability. "The relied upon documents are only 421, while the unrelied-upon documents are 1,675. The court finds the prayer for being provided with all unrelied documents to be designed to condemn the trial to a maze at the very outset, and that too when the accused have not even begun to lay out any particular defence by way of questions, suggestions or a projected defence," Judge Gogne said.

He said if the court was to rule upon the relevance, necessity or desirability of the production of hundreds, if not thousands, of unrelied documents even before the witnesses uttered a single statement and even before a single volley had been fired upon them during cross-examination, it would be "drawn into expressing mind upon the relevance of unrelied documents only to suit the defence." The judge also said he could sense a "latent" or "underlying intent" by the applicants to drag proceedings into an exercise where the provision of 1,675 unrelied documents would conceivably be followed by a plethora of applications seeking missing or illegible documents. "A court of trial must guard against latent motives of applicants apart from unreasonable outcomes," he said. Regarding Mahjan's plea, the judge said it was "entirely self-serving" for him to contend that cross-examination would be hampered by the non-availability of a CBI file, which was not even a relied upon document. He said, "The court would reiterate that the statutory scheme of trial cannot be inverted so that proceedings turn into a trial of unrelied documents to the detriment of relied documents." In its order, the court also highlighted the charges against Lalu Prasad Yadav that he allegedly abused his official position as the then Union railway minister to ensure appointments of certain persons to Group D posts in the Indian Railways. In an alleged quid pro quo, the candidates so appointed or their family members sold or gifted their respective land holdings to the family members of Lalu Prasad, and co-applicant Rabri Devi was one such member, the court said. His then personal secretary, Mahajan, allegedly abused his official position, in conspiracy with him and others, to ensure many such appointments by communicating lists of nominees canvassed by Lalu Prasad with various general managers, including Kapoor, who were the appointing authority, it said. On January 9, the court had ordered framing charges against RJD supremo Lalu Prasad, his family members and others. It has framed charges in the case against 41 accused persons and discharged 52 others. Out of the 103 accused named in the CBI's chargesheet, five have died.