Supreme Court stays vigilance probe against Pinarayi Vijayan in CMRL case, FIR to remain

New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Wednesday stayed the vigilance investigation against Pinarayi Vijayan and others in the alleged Cochin Minerals and Rutile Limited (CMRL)-Exalogic bribery case, while directing that the FIR remain in place.

A vacation bench comprising Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana granted interim relief to Vijayan, his daughter Veena T and son-in-law P A Mohammed Riyas, who had challenged the Kerala High Court orders directing the registration of an FIR in the case.

The Supreme Court also cautioned the Enforcement Directorate (ED) against exceeding its jurisdiction. During the hearing, Justice Bagchi pointed to inconsistencies in the single judge's order that had directed the registration of the FIR.

The court indicated that the FIR would not be disturbed, but the investigation would remain stalled until the relevant issues were decided by the appellate court.
Also read | CMRL case: Congress divided over govt's stand on Vijayan as some insiders seek payback for Chandy

Supreme Court's observations in CMRL case

During the hearing, Justice Bagchi questioned aspects of the Kerala High Court single judge's order, observing that it contained contradictory positions on the registration of the FIR and the need for an investigation.

The bench examined whether the material provided by the ED was sufficient to warrant an investigation under the Prevention of Corruption Act. It also considered whether a public servant should have an opportunity to present arguments on the merits before an order is passed directing the registration of an FIR.

The court's intervention comes as Vijayan and the other petitioners challenge the legal basis of the vigilance case. The ED was also cautioned to operate within the limits of its statutory authority.

Why Pinarayi Vijayan approached the Supreme Court

The petitions followed the Kerala High Court's October 15 decision rejecting applications by Vijayan, Veena and Riyas seeking permission to appeal against a single judge's October 9 order.

The single judge had directed the Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau (VACB) to register a case based on information submitted by the ED to the state police in connection with the alleged CMRL payments to Exalogic Solutions, Veena's now-defunct company.

The petitioners argued that they had not been heard before the single judge issued the direction. They also contended that the original petition was in the nature of a public interest litigation and should have been considered by a division bench.

The High Court had observed that an accused in a corruption case has no legal right to be heard before the registration of an FIR.

Following the High Court's rejection of their applications, the petitioners moved the Supreme Court seeking relief against the orders.
Also read | CMRL case: VD Satheesan says Kerala govt acted according to law, not in haste

What is the CMRL-Exalogic case?

The case concerns alleged payments of Rs 2.78 crore by CMRL to Exalogic Solutions under the guise of IT consultancy services. The ED has alleged that the payments were linked to benefits extended to the company by the state government when the CPM was in power.

The ED sought the registration of a case based on material gathered during its investigation under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) and searches conducted as part of the probe.

On October 9, the Kerala High Court directed the VACB to register a case based on the ED's report. The vigilance agency subsequently registered two FIRs in connection with the allegations.

The Supreme Court's interim order stays the vigilance investigation for now, but does not amount to the cancellation of the FIR. Further proceedings will depend on the court's final directions and the outcome of the legal challenge.