The Delhi High Court, on January 6, 2026, formally directed the Central Bureau of Investigation to file its response to a petition submitted by Rashtriya Janata Dal leader Tejashwi Prasad Yadav, contesting the trial court's October 13, 2025, order that framed serious charges against him in the protracted alleged IRCTC scam case involving corruption and irregularities in hotel contracts.
Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma issued a notice to the CBI concerning Tejashwi's main plea as well as his application seeking a stay on the lower court proceedings, while scheduling the next hearing for January 14, 2026, to coincide with a parallel petition filed by his father, former Union Railway Minister Lalu Prasad Yadav, who is similarly challenging the same charge-framing decision.
The trial court's ruling had framed charges against Lalu Prasad Yadav, his wife Rabri Devi, son Tejashwi Prasad Yadav, and 11 additional accused individuals for offences encompassing cheating under IPC Section 420, criminal conspiracy under Section 120B, and criminal misconduct by a public servant under relevant sections of the Prevention of Corruption Act, with potential penalties extending up to 10 years imprisonment.
Also Read: Delhi High Court Seeks CBI Reply on Lalu Prasad Yadav’s Plea Challenging IRCTC Scam Charges
Central to the allegations are claims of irregularities during Lalu Prasad Yadav's ministerial tenure from 2004 to 2009, where operational and maintenance contracts for two IRCTC hotels in Ranchi and Puri were purportedly awarded to a private firm, Sujata Hotels, through a manipulated tender process in exchange for undue benefits, including the transfer of valuable land parcels to entities linked to the Yadav family at significantly undervalued prices.
Specific charges under the Prevention of Corruption Act were applied to several co-accused, while a common conspiracy charge implicated the entire group, including M/s LARA Projects LLP and private individuals such as Vijay Kochhar and Vinay Kochhar; the Yadav family has consistently maintained that the case lacks evidentiary support and is motivated by political considerations.
As the High Court proceedings advance, attention remains focused on whether the CBI's forthcoming reply will address the petitioners' arguments regarding the sufficiency of prima facie evidence, with the joint hearing on January 14 expected to determine potential interim relief and the trajectory of this high-profile corruption matter.
Also Read: Tirupati Laddu Case: Delhi High Court Rejects Y V Subba Reddy’s Plea for Gag Order