CMRL-Exalogic case: SC stays probe against Pinarayi Vijayan for a week

SC stayed the investigation for a week into the FIR against former Keralam CM Pinarayi Vijayan in the CMRL-Exalogic case. The court allowed them to approach the Kerala HC's division bench and questioned the haste in filing the FIR.

Supreme Court Stays Investigation

The Supreme Court on Wednesday stayed the investigation for a week into the FIR against former Keralam Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan, his daughter Veena Thaikkandiyil and son-in-law Mohammed Riyas in the CMRL-Exalogic corruption case, allowing them to approach the Kerala High Court's division bench against an order directing registration of the FIR.

A vacation bench of Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana set aside the High Court division bench's order denying them leave to appeal against the single Judge's direction.

The apex court clarified that the FIR would remain in place, but the investigation would remain suspended for seven days to enable the petitioners to seek interim relief from the appellate court.

The bench also questioned the haste with which the single Judge had ordered an FIR on the basis of an Enforcement Directorate (ED) communication under Section 66(2) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), particularly when the State had already constituted a Special Investigation Team (SIT) to conduct a preliminary inquiry. It also noted that Vijayan had not been heard before the order was passed.

Arguments in Court

“The FIR is registered. That is it. We will allow the FIR to exist, but we will stall the investigation,” Justice Bagchi said, cautioning the ED against exceeding its statutory powers to influence the functioning of other investigative agencies. “Don't use the process of statutory powers to meddle into the statutory domain of other entities,” the bench observed.

The top court also said that the question of whether an ED communication under Section 66(2) obliges a State agency to register an FIR in a corruption case requires examination. It rejected the argument that the Supreme Court's judgment in Vijay Madanlal Choudhary made such registration mandatory in every case. “The PMLA can’t be the super-administrator mandating everything everywhere,” Justice Bagchi remarked.

Senior advocate Sidharth Luthra, appearing for the petitioners, argued that the single Judge had directed registration of the FIR without hearing Vijayan and questioned whether the State was legally bound to act on the ED's recommendation. The complainant, KM Shajahan, maintained that the ED communication imposed an obligation on the State to register an FIR. ED counsel Zoheb Hossain submitted that the material disclosed cognisable offences.

The bench clarified that its observations were confined to the petitioners' right to pursue an appeal and did not express any opinion on the merits of the case. The High Court division vench is free to decide the appeal and any application for interim relief independently.

Background of the Case

Before the apex court, Vijayan sought protection from arrest and other coercive action in a corruption case linked to the alleged Cochin Minerals and Rutile Limited (CMRL)-Exalogic payoff.

Earlier on Thursday, the Kerala High Court division bench declined to interfere with the direction to register FIRs against Vijayan, his daughter and son-in-law, over alleged financial transactions between CMRL and Veena's now-defunct firm, Exalogic Solutions. It dismissed their appeals against a single-judge-bench order, holding that an accused in a corruption case has no right to be heard before an FIR is registered. It, however, clarified that they could pursue other constitutional and statutory remedies.

On October 9, the High Court single-judge bench ordered the State's Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau (VACB) to initiate a criminal case following a report forwarded by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) to the police. The ED had called for a case to be registered on the basis of material collected during its probe, including searches carried out under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act.

The FIRs were registered by the VACB following allegations of corruption and conspiracy involving payments by CMRL and an associate concern to Exalogic and Veena. The agency alleged that CMRL improperly transferred Rs 2.78 crore to Exalogic Solutions, a company formerly run by Veena, by portraying the payments as fees for IT consultancy services. (ANI)

(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by Asianet Newsable English staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)