The Supreme Court on Wednesday set aside a Kerala High Court order declining to entertain appeals filed by former Kerala Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan, his daughter T. Veena, son-in-law and former Minister P.A. Mohammed Riyas
NEW DELHI — The Supreme Court on Wednesday set aside a Kerala High Court order declining to entertain appeals filed by former Kerala Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan, his daughter T. Veena, son-in-law and former Minister P.A. Mohammed Riyas, and others against a direction to register a vigilance FIR in the CMRL-Exalogic alleged pay-off case, allowing them a week to approach the High Court’s Division Bench.
A Bench of Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V. Mohana directed that the investigation into the FIR registered by the Kerala Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau (VACB) shall remain stayed for seven days to enable the petitioners to pursue their appeals and seek interim relief before the appellate forum.
The apex court clarified that its observations were confined to the question of whether the petitioners were entitled to challenge the single judge’s order and would not prejudice the adjudication of their appeals on merits.
The proceedings stem from an October 9 order of a single judge of the Kerala High Court directing the registration of an FIR under the Prevention of Corruption Act on the basis of material communicated by the Enforcement Directorate (ED).
Vijayan, Veena, his son-in-law Mohammed Riyas and others approached the Supreme Court after a Division Bench of the Kerala High Court declined to stay the single judge’s directions and reserved its decision on whether they could maintain appeals against an order passed in proceedings to which they were not parties.
Rejecting the contention advanced by the ED and the original writ petitioner that the appellants had no right to challenge the single judge’s directions, the Supreme Court held that they had made out a prima facie case to establish their locus standi to pursue the appeals.
The Justice Bagchi-led Bench observed that the single judge had specifically recorded a finding that the material furnished by the ED disclosed a cognizable offence, making registration of an FIR obligatory. Since this finding could affect the petitioners in separate proceedings challenging the FIR, they could not be denied an opportunity to contest it before the appellate forum.
“This is not a case where, on the receipt of communication under Section 66(2) PMLA, the state government had registered an FIR on its own. On the contrary, the registration of FIR and commencement of investigation were pursuant to the order passed by the Constitutional Court,” the apex court observed.
It further said that the single judge had gone beyond directing registration of the FIR by ordering commencement of the investigation and submission of the final report.
“Commencement of investigation and taking the same to its logical conclusion under the Prevention of Corruption Act requires compliance with other conditions of the special law,” the apex court said, adding that these circumstances established a prima facie basis for the petitioners to seek leave to appeal.
Setting aside the impugned order, the Supreme Court permitted the petitioners to pursue their appeals before the Kerala High Court’s Division Bench.
“We are not against any investigation. We will maintain the FIR but no investigation until and unless the issues are decided by the appellate court,” the Justice Bagchi-led Bench orally observed during the hearing.
It clarified that the seven-day stay was intended solely to facilitate the filing of the appeals and would not constrain the Division Bench from independently deciding any application seeking interim relief in accordance with law.
The case concerns alleged payments made by Cochin Minerals and Rutile Limited (CMRL) to Exalogic Solutions Pvt Ltd, a company founded by Veena, during the first Vijayan-led government in Kerala.
The ED had alleged that Exalogic received INR 3.28 crore from CMRL for services that were not provided and claimed that the payments were made due to political influence, amounting to a bribe to Vijayan.
The former Chief Minister has been named as the first accused and Veena as the second accused, among seven persons named in the case.
Following the single judge’s order, Vigilance Director Manoj Abraham had directed the formation of a probe team, with Deputy Inspector General of Police Thomson Jose supervising the investigation.