Supreme Court Grants Pinarayi Vijayan a Week to Challenge Vigilance FIR in Pay-Off Case

Supreme Court's Intervention in Kerala Pay-Off Case

New Delhi: On Wednesday, the Supreme Court overturned a decision by the Kerala High Court that had refused to hear appeals from former Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan, his daughter T. Veena, son-in-law P.A. Mohammed Riyas, and others regarding a directive to file a vigilance FIR in the alleged CMRL-Exalogic pay-off case. The court has granted them a week to approach the High Court’s Division Bench.

A bench comprising Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V. Mohana ordered a stay on the investigation initiated by the Kerala Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau (VACB) for seven days, allowing the petitioners to seek interim relief from the appellate court.

The Supreme Court clarified that its remarks were limited to whether the petitioners could contest the single judge’s order and would not influence the merits of their appeals.

This case originated from an October 9 ruling by a single judge of the Kerala High Court, which mandated the filing of an FIR under the Prevention of Corruption Act based on information provided by the Enforcement Directorate (ED).

Vijayan, Veena, and Riyas approached the Supreme Court after a Division Bench of the Kerala High Court refused to suspend the single judge’s order and deliberated on their right to appeal against a ruling in which they were not involved.

The Supreme Court dismissed the ED's argument that the appellants lacked the standing to challenge the single judge’s order, asserting that they had established a prima facie case to pursue their appeals.

Justice Bagchi noted that the single judge had determined that the evidence provided by the ED indicated a cognizable offense, necessitating the registration of an FIR. This finding could impact the petitioners in separate legal actions contesting the FIR, thus they should be allowed to challenge it in the appellate court.

The court remarked, "This is not a situation where the state government independently registered an FIR upon receiving communication under Section 66(2) of the PMLA. Instead, the FIR and investigation were initiated following an order from the Constitutional Court."

Additionally, the court pointed out that the single judge had exceeded the directive for FIR registration by also ordering the investigation's initiation and the submission of a final report.

The Supreme Court emphasized that the initiation of an investigation under the Prevention of Corruption Act must adhere to specific legal requirements, establishing a prima facie basis for the petitioners to seek permission to appeal.

By nullifying the contested order, the Supreme Court allowed the petitioners to pursue their appeals before the Kerala High Court’s Division Bench.

The bench stated, "We are not opposed to any investigation. We will uphold the FIR but will halt the investigation until the appellate court resolves the issues raised."

The court clarified that the seven-day stay was solely to facilitate the filing of appeals and would not restrict the Division Bench from independently addressing any interim relief applications as per the law.

This case revolves around alleged payments made by Cochin Minerals and Rutile Limited (CMRL) to Exalogic Solutions Pvt Ltd, a company established by Veena, during Vijayan's first term as Chief Minister of Kerala.

The ED has claimed that Exalogic received ₹3.28 crore from CMRL for services that were never rendered, alleging that these payments were politically motivated bribes to Vijayan.

Vijayan has been named the primary accused, with Veena listed as the second accused among seven individuals implicated in the case.

Following the single judge’s ruling, Vigilance Director Manoj Abraham instructed the formation of a probe team, with Deputy Inspector General of Police Thomson Jose overseeing the investigation.