Pinarayi, Veena and Riyas face new legal battle: High Court orders Vigilance FIR in monthly payments case

KOCHI: The Kerala High Court has directed the Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau to register a case under the Prevention of Corruption Act in the CMRL–Exalogic case involving CPI(M) leader and Leader of the Opposition Pinarayi Vijayan, his daughter T. Veena and his son-in-law, former minister P.A. Mohamed Riyas. The ruling has set aside the state government's decision to conduct a preliminary inquiry through a Special Investigation Team (SIT) instead of registering an FIR, opening the way for a Vigilance investigation into the allegations.

Justice A. Badharudeen issued the direction on a petition filed by advocate K.M. Shajahan, a former staff member of late Chief Minister V.S. Achuthanandan. The court's order followed information forwarded by the Enforcement Directorate (ED), which had sought the registration of a corruption case against Vijayan, Veena, Riyas and others based on material gathered during its investigation under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act.

The allegations centre on payments made by Cochin Minerals and Rutile Ltd (CMRL) to Exalogic Solutions, a company associated with Veena, ostensibly for IT and consultancy services. The ED has alleged that the payments were not backed by corresponding services and were part of a wider arrangement involving the alleged transfer of funds.

The case centres on alleged payments by CMRL to Exalogic Solutions, a company associated with T. Veena, and a separate allegation that Rs 3.28 crore was paid to Pinarayi Vijayan through his daughter. The ED has alleged that the payments were not backed by corresponding services and formed part of a wider arrangement. The allegations are yet to be established in court.

The ED has also alleged that funds were moved through hawala channels and that Riyas was involved in the transfer of money to Dubai through Veena and others.

The court also held that the constitution of the Special Investigation Team (SIT) was contrary to the Police Act. It observed that the authority to appoint a special team rested with the government, whereas, in this case, the action had been taken by the Director General of Police (DGP).

The court said the Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau was the appropriate agency to investigate the corruption allegations. Observing that there were indications of an offence, it held that a case could be registered directly without a preliminary inquiry.

Appeal and further investigation

• The order may be challenged before a division bench by the parties concerned. Any request to quash an FIR, if registered, would be a separate legal step.
• The Vigilance Bureau is to investigate the alleged offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act. The ED, meanwhile, has already been conducting a separate investigation under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act and may take further action within the scope of that investigation.
• The Crime Branch material gathered during the preliminary inquiry is expected to be transferred to the Vigilance Bureau, according to the Malayalam source report. The report also says the case may be registered in Thiruvananthapuram or Kochi; these operational details require confirmation from the authorities.