New Delhi, Oct 29: The Delhi High Court on Thursday sought a response from the Enforcement Directorate (ED) on a plea filed by former Bihar Chief Minister Lalu Prasad Yadav challenging the trial court’s decision to frame charges against him in the alleged IRCTC money laundering case.

Justice Sachin Datta issued notice to the ED on Yadav’s petition challenging the September 10 order of the Rouse Avenue court, which framed money laundering charges against him and several other accused.

The High Court also allowed Yadav to seek an adjournment before the trial court until the next hearing in the High Court. The matter will now be heard on December 3.

On September 10, Special Judge Vishal Gogne framed charges against nine accused, including Lalu Prasad Yadav, his wife Rabri Devi, son Tejashwi Yadav, former Union minister Prem Chand Gupta, Sarla Gupta, LARA Projects LLP, Sujata Hotel Pvt Ltd, and businessmen Vijay Kochhar and Vinay Kochhar.

The trial court observed that the material on record raised a strong suspicion against the accused and warranted a trial. It also noted allegations of abuse of office and the possession of alleged proceeds of crime in connection with land transactions in Patna.

The court discharged seven other accused, finding that the material against them did not warrant framing of charges.

The ED case originates from a CBI investigation into alleged irregularities in the award of IRCTC hotel tenders during Lalu Prasad Yadav’s tenure as Railway Minister. The agency alleges that the tender process was manipulated and that the alleged proceeds of crime were linked to land transactions in Patna.

In a separate plea in the same case, the Delhi High Court has stayed the trial court’s order framing charges against Sujata Hotel Pvt Ltd. The relief is limited to the company and does not extend to the other accused.

Also Read: Cyclone Arnab kills 8 in Andhra Pradesh; Heavy rain alert in Odisha, 8 other states

Sujata Hotel has argued that the trial court failed to identify any independent act by the company that could constitute a money laundering offence. It has also contended that it neither owned nor sold the land in question and that the relevant transaction was carried out by another company, Delight Marketing Company Pvt Ltd.

The company has further argued that the land transaction took place in February 2005, before the alleged irregularities in the IRCTC hotel tender process in 2006.  The allegations in the case are yet to be established at trial. (ANI)