Kochi: The Kerala High Court on Tuesday asked the state government why it had ordered a preliminary enquiry after receiving information from the Enforcement Directorate regarding alleged Prevention of Corruption Act offenses involving Pinarayi Vijayan and others in the CMRL bribery case.
The question arose before a bench of Justices K Natarajan and Johnson John during the consideration of applications filed by Vijayan, his daughter Veena T, and her husband P A Mohamed Riyas. The trio is seeking leave to appeal against an October 9 directive issued by a single judge instructing the Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau to register a first information report against them.
Advocate General Jaju Babu informed the bench that the state government initiated a preliminary enquiry to verify the allegations contained within the Enforcement Directorate's information. He added that the federal agency had not provided the state police with several other connected materials regarding the matter.
In their appeals, Vijayan, Veena, and Riyas contended that they were denied a hearing by the single judge prior to the order directing the registration of the FIR. During the extended hearing, the bench questioned why the appellants had not challenged the FIR directly once it was formally registered, and whether a proposed accused must always be granted a hearing before an FIR is lodged in a criminal case.
Lawyers representing the appellants argued that a hearing was necessary because the matter was handled via a writ petition, meaning the resulting order directly impacts them. They noted that the situation differed from a routine police FIR, and emphasized that since the High Court itself ordered the registration, the appellants could not challenge it before the same forum.
Additionally, the defense argued that the original petition handled by the single judge functioned similarly to a public interest litigation and should have been adjudicated by an appropriate division bench. The court indicated that it would resume the proceedings during the post-lunch session.
The appeals followed the Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau's Special Investigation Unit-1 filing two FIRs on Monday against Vijayan and his family members in connection with the CMRL matter. The legal actions trace back to an October 9 High Court directive based on an Enforcement Directorate report, which alleged that CMRL made fraudulent payments totaling Rs 2.78 crore to Veena's defunct enterprise, Exalogic Solutions, under the guise of IT consultancy services.