SignIn
Kerala Kaumudi Online
Thursday, 22 October 2026 3.28 AM IST

Single Bench order in monthly pay-off case contradictory, says Supreme Court; questions need for prior prosecution sanction

Increase Font Size Decrease Font Size Print Page
sc
SC

NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court has questioned how an investigation could be initiated against former Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan without even considering whether the prior prosecution sanction stipulated under Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act was required in the case. The court also criticised the state government's stand on the issue.

The Supreme Court observed that the Kerala High Court Single Bench order directing the Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau (VACB) to register an FIR in the monthly pay-off case contained contradictory findings.

Under Section 66(2) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), the Enforcement Directorate (ED) can share investigation details with the state police. However, the main legal question in this case is whether the police must register a case based on the information received or conduct a preliminary inquiry first.

The Single Bench order contained conflicting observations on this issue. At one point, it said that registering a case was mandatory. Elsewhere, it stated that a preliminary inquiry was necessary. The court also noted that the Single Bench had found the information shared by the ED sufficient to register a case. The Supreme Court said the Division Bench must examine whether the Vigilance investigation could legally proceed.

Pinarayi's counsel, Siddharth Luthra, argued that injustice had been done to his client. He pointed out that the petition before the High Court had been filed by social activist K.M. Shahjahan, who had no direct connection with the case. He also said that neither the Single Bench nor the Division Bench had heard Pinarayi's side.

Supreme Court's questions to the state government

- Wasn't the Single Bench order contrary to the government's stand that it had the authority to conduct a preliminary inquiry?
- If the government was dissatisfied with the order, why did it not file an appeal before the Division Bench?
- Was the government waiting for someone else to approach the court?
- If prior sanction is sought to prosecute Pinarayi Vijayan, what stand will the government take?
- Will the government take an independent decision, or wait for directions from the High Court or the Supreme Court before acting?

RELATED TOPICS: SUPREME COURT, MONTHLY PAY OFF CASE, PINARAYI VIJAYAN, KERALA HIGH COURT SINGLE BENCH, MC MAYIN HAJI
KERALA KAUMUDI EPAPER
TRENDING IN KERALA
TRENDING IN KERALA
X
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet
consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat.
We respect your privacy. Your information is safe and will never be shared.