The Supreme Court on Wednesday declined to defer the framing of charges by a trial court against RJD president Lalu Prasad in the alleged land-for-jobs scam during his tenure as railway minister between 2004 and 2009.

A bench of Justices M.M. Sundresh and N.K. Singh was dealing with Lalu’s plea for deferment on the ground that his petition to quash the case is pending before Delhi High Court where the hearing is scheduled on August 12.

The bench refrained from entertaining a request from Lalu’s counsel for adjournment of the matter as senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for the RJD leader, was busy with Justice Yashwant Varma’s case.

Additional solicitor-general S.V. Raju, appearing for the CBI, opposed Lalu’s plea, saying the former minister could raise his objections before the special court dealing with the offence, including the question relating to Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act, as the RJD leader had argued that no sanction was obtained for his prosecution.

However, the bench, without going into the merits of the controversy, said: “We are not passing any order. Taking note of the apprehension, we say framing of charges will not make the pending petition before the high court infructuous.”

The bench declined Raju’s plea to impose costs on Lalu for “wasting” the court’s time by filing such applications.

“Lordships may impose costs. Persons with big pockets can make such applications,” Raju said.

“We are not imposing costs,” the bench responded.

On July 18, the apex court had declined Lalu’s plea for staying the trial in the land-for-jobs case registered against him by the CBI in 2022 under the Prevention of Corruption Act.

The bench of Justices M.M. Sundresh and N. Kotiswar Singh had, however, extended a relief to Lalu by exempting him from personally appearing before the special CBI court. It had asked the RJD chief to wait for the high court’s verdict.

“We will not stay the high court order. This is a small issue, but what we can do is that we will dispense with his personal appearance,” the bench had told Sibal.

The top court was dealing with Lalu’s appeal challenging the high court’s interim order on May 29 declining to quash the FIR or stay the trial proceedings. Aggrieved, Lalu had filed the appeal.