New Delhi: The CBI on Tuesday opposed in the Supreme Court RJD supremo Lalu Prasad Yadav’s plea for bail, saying it will set “very wrong precedent” in cases involving “serious corruption in high offices”.The CBI told a bench headed by Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi that Yadav is likely to get involved in political activities and misuse the bail ahead of the upcoming Lok Sabha polls. “It is, in the most humble and respectful submission of the investigating agency, a case where grant of bail would set a very wrong precedent in cases involving a serious corruption in high offices,” CBI said. Also Read – Uddhav bats for ‘Sena CM'”It is respectfully submitted that if these considerations are permitted to be raised by the convicted accused, even a businessman who is found guilty of corruption can seek bail on the ground that he wants to do his business in spite of gravity of the offence and the period for which he is convicted,” it said. The apex court, which will hear Yadav’s bail plea on April 10, had asked the CBI to file its reply by today. The CBI said that in any case Yadav has been in a hospital ward for over eight months and indulging in political activities. Also Read – Farooq demands unconditional release of all detainees in J&K”During the period in which the petitioner (Lalu Yadav) remained in hospital, he is not only granted a special paying ward with all facilities but he is virtually conducting his political activities from there which would be clear form the list of visitors,” the CBI said in its reply. It said Yadav claimed to be so unwell that he could not remain in jail and needed to be hospitalised, but is suddenly fully fit physically and has sought bail. “It is submitted that simultaneous raising of pleas for bails on medical grounds and bail to guide the party and to carry out all essential responsibilities as a party president in ensuing Lok Sabha elections are mutually contradictory and manifest that in the garb of bail on medical ground the petitioner in essence wants to pursue his political activities which is impermissible in law,” the CBI said. It further said that Yadav seems to have created an impression that he is convicted for only 3.5 years and has already undergone substantial portion, which is “misleading” and “factually incorrect”. It said the total period of sentence awarded to Yadav was 168 months for all four of his convictions, out of which he has undergone only 20 months, which was less than 15 percent of the sentence awarded. “Thus as per his own averment the Petitioner (Yadav) does not qualify the ‘half sentence theory’ for seeking suspension of sentence and bail,” CBI said. Considering the gravity of the offence of corruption in public as well as the constitutional office which the petitioner abused and misappropriated huge amount of public money, and considering that the petitioner is to undergo 27.5 years of sentence (cumulatively calculated for all four convictions), the discretionary remedy of grant of bail is rightly refused by both the courts below, it said.