CMRL-Exalogic case: Kerala High Court orders State Police to lodge FIR against ex-CM Pinarayi Vijayan based on ED's recommendation

The Kerala High Court on Friday a directed the State Police to register a first information report (FIR) against former Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan and others in connection with the CMRL-Exalogic case [Adv KM Shajahan v State of Kerala & ors].

Justice A Badharudeen allowed the petition filed by advocate KM Shajahan.

"Writ petition allowed. Direction to register FIR," the Court said.

The CMRL-Exalogic case involves allegations of corruption against former CM Vijayan and his daughter Veena Thaikkandiyil.

The petition before the High Court was filed by advocate KM Shajahan questioning the non-registration of an FIR in the matter.

The plea is tied to material allegedly shared by the ED with the Kerala police, following the ED's investigation into financial transactions between Cochin Minerals and Rutile Limited (CMRL) and Exalogic Solutions Private Limited, a company owned by Veena Thaikkandiyil.

However, instead of registering an FIR, the State constituted a Special Investigation Team (SIT), headed by Crime Branch Additional Director General of Police H Venkatesh, to conduct a preliminary enquiry.

The petitioner questioned this move. His plea stated that the ED had unearthed material indicating the possible commission of offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, and the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) against Vijayan, his daughter, her husband, and former Minister PA Muhammed Riyas.

Shajahan, therefore, sought the registration of an FIR against those allegedly involved in the case, and the transfer of the investigation to the Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau (VACB).

He also sought directions to the State Police and the Vigilance Director to act on complaints submitted by him in the matter on September 22.

During hearings before the High Court, the ED supported Shajahan's plea for the registration of an FIR in the case.

ED's standing counsel, Jaishankar V Nair, submitted that the ED had come across several transactions that required a probe by the State Police or another competent agency.

Advocate General Jaju Babu, appearing for the State, meanwhile raised a preliminary objection to the maintainability of the petition. He argued that although the petitioner portrayed the proceeding as being in public interest, it had been filed as a private writ petition.

AG Babu also maintained that receipt of information from ED did not take away the State agency's power to independently examine whether the materials disclosed any offence warranting the registration of an FIR.

The petitioner was represented by advocates V Sethunath, Thomas Abraham, and Shamnas S.