IRCTC Scam Explained: What Is The Case About And How Much Money Was Allegedly Misappropriated?
In a recent development in one of India’s most high-profile corruption cases, the long-running IRCTC scam has reached a critical point. Delhi’s Rouse Avenue Court has formally framed charges against former Railway Minister Lalu Prasad Yadav, former Bihar Chief Minister Rabri Devi, their son and current Leader of Opposition Tejashwi Yadav, and 11 others.
The case revolves around alleged irregularities and corruption in awarding contracts for two IRCTC hotels in Ranchi and Puri during Lalu Prasad Yadav’s tenure as Railway Minister between 2004 and 2009. The court’s decision comes just weeks before the Bihar Assembly elections, adding a political dimension to the legal proceedings.
What Is the IRCTC Scam?
The IRCTC scam dates back to when Lalu Prasad Yadav headed the Railways under the UPA government. During this period, the Indian Railways leased two BNR hotels—one in Ranchi and another in Puri, to the Indian Railway Catering and Tourism Corporation (IRCTC) for operation and maintenance.
The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) later alleged that the bidding process for these hotels was manipulated to favor Sujata Hotels Private Limited, a private company owned by Vinay and Vijay Kochhar.
Alleged Bribes and Benami Land Deals
According to the CBI, the Lalu family allegedly received three acres of prime Patna land as a quid pro quo for awarding the hotel contracts to Sujata Hotels. The land was transferred via a benami company, Digital Marketing Limited, and later acquired by Lara Projects LLP, linked to Rabri Devi and Tejashwi Yadav.
Shockingly, land worth around ₹94 crore was reportedly sold for just ₹65 lakh, while its circle rate stood at ₹32 crore. The agency claims this transaction benefited the accused at the public’s expense.
On Monday, Special Judge Vishal Gogne formally framed charges of criminal conspiracy and cheating against Rabri Devi and Tejashwi Yadav. Lalu Prasad Yadav faces charges under the Prevention of Corruption Act for alleged abuse of public office.
The court’s order, delivered in open court, noted:
“You engaged in conspiracy and abused your position as a public servant. You influenced the tender and manipulated eligibility conditions. You conspired for undervalued purchase of land parcels.”
All accused pleaded not guilty, stating they would face trial. A detailed order is expected to be uploaded by the court soon.
Details from the CBI Chargesheet
The chargesheet filed by the CBI outlines a conspiracy spanning 2004 to 2014, wherein the two IRCTC hotels were transferred to IRCTC and later leased to Sujata Hotels. The investigation alleges the tender process was rigged, with conditions manipulated to favor the private firm.
The case names several other individuals and entities, including:
- V K Asthana and R K Goyal, group general managers of IRCTC.
- Vijay and Vinay Kochhar, directors of Sujata Hotels and owners of Chanakya Hotel.
- Corporate entities Delight Marketing Company (now Lara Projects LLP) and Sujata Hotels Private Limited.
Charges against the accused include:
- Sections 420 & 120B of IPC (cheating and criminal conspiracy) for Rabri Devi and Tejashwi Yadav.
- Criminal misconduct and conspiracy for Lalu Prasad Yadav.
The Timing And Affect Of These Charges
The court’s order arrives just ahead of the 2025 Bihar Assembly elections, heightening political stakes. Lalu’s party, the Rashtriya Janata Dal (RJD), now faces a trial that could impact its electoral strategy, especially against the ruling Nitish Kumar-BJP alliance.
Legal Timeline
- July 7, 2017: CBI files FIR against Lalu Prasad Yadav.
- April 2018: Charge sheet filed by the CBI.
- March 1, 2025: CBI concludes arguments against Lalu, Rabri Devi, Tejashwi Yadav, and other accused.
- September 24, 2025: Court directs all accused to appear physically.
- October 13, 2025: Charges framed by Delhi’s Rouse Avenue Court.
Senior advocate Maninder Singh, representing Lalu, has argued that no material exists to frame charges and that the tender was awarded fairly and transparently. However, the court found sufficient grounds to proceed with the trial.
india