Kerala HC to rule on plea seeking corruption case in CMRL–Exalogic controversy
Kerala HC to rule on plea seeking corruption case in CMRL–Exalogic controversy
Veena Vijayan with husband and former Minister Mohammed Royas


Kochi, 09 Oct (H.S.):The Kerala High Court will on Friday pronounce its verdict on a petition challenging the failure to register a corruption case against Opposition Leader Pinarayi Vijayan, his daughter T. Veena and former minister P.A. Mohamed Riyas in the CMRL–Exalogic monthly payment controversy.

Justice A. Badharudeen will decide the petition filed by advocate K.M. Shajahan, who sought action under the Prevention of Corruption Act based on information communicated by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) to the state police.

The petitioner argued that the ED’s letter disclosed serious offences and provided sufficient grounds for registering a first information report without conducting a preliminary inquiry. He maintained that the police should act directly on findings shared by the central agency during its investigation.

The principal legal question examined by the court was whether information supplied by the ED concerning suspected offences obliges the police to immediately register an FIR. A copy of the agency’s letter to the Director General of Police was submitted to the court in a sealed cover.

The state government opposed the petition, contending that it was not maintainable. It argued that receipt of information from the ED did not automatically require the police to register a criminal case immediately.

Citing Supreme Court rulings, the government maintained that the obligation to register an FIR must be assessed within the applicable legal framework.

The ED, however, supported the petitioner’s position. It told the court that information shared under Section 66(2) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act placed a legal obligation on the police to register an FIR.

The agency also argued that a preliminary inquiry was unnecessary in this instance.

Friday’s ruling will address the competing arguments over whether the ED’s communication warranted immediate registration of a case or whether the authorities could undertake further examination before initiating criminal proceedings.

---------------

Hindusthan Samachar / Arun Lakshman


 rajesh pande