Kochi: ADGP M R Ajith Kumar, considered a close aide of Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan, on Monday approached the Kerala High Court challenging a Vigilance court’s decision to reject the clean chit he had received in a disproportionate assets case.

The petition, filed through senior advocate Ram Kumar, is expected to be taken up for hearing on Tuesday.

Ajith Kumar’s move comes two weeks after the Vigilance court refused to accept the exoneration report, noting indications of political interference and misuse of power.

The development has given fresh ammunition to the UDF, which has demanded Vijayan’s resignation following the court’s order.

Ajith Kumar, long regarded as one of Vijayan’s most trusted officers, has faced multiple allegations of corruption and misconduct. Adding to the controversy, advocate N Nagaraj, the original complainant in the disproportionate assets case, has announced his intention to approach the court again, this time targeting the Vigilance officials who granted the clean chit.

Meanwhile, the Kerala government has faced criticism over what has been described as “extraordinary protection” extended to Ajith Kumar. Reports by the former state police chief recommending disciplinary action against him in two separate cases were recently returned by the government, which has now sought fresh opinions from the newly appointed state police chief.

One case relates to the Thrissur Pooram unrest, where an inquiry found that Ajith Kumar, despite being present in Thrissur, failed to respond to repeated phone calls from Revenue Minister K. Rajan during the disturbances. The probe, led by then DGP Shelin Darvesh Sahib, concluded that this constituted a serious dereliction of duty, a recommendation also endorsed by the Home Secretary.

The second case involves allegations that Ajith Kumar provided a false statement implicating Intelligence ADGP P Vijayan in a gold smuggling case. The DGP had sought government clearance for legal action. However, senior police officials have described the government’s decision to return both reports for re-examination as highly unusual, noting that high-level findings of this nature are rarely reconsidered.

 

IANS