Kochi: The Kerala High Court on Tuesday declined to grant an interim stay on a single judge's direction instructing the Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau to register a first information report against former Kerala Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan and several others in connection with the alleged CMRL bribery case.
A division bench comprising Justices K Natarajan and Johnson John noted that the court must first determine whether to entertain the applications seeking permission to appeal against the October 9 order before it can consider any request for a stay. The bench has reserved its order on those specific maintainability applications.
The proceedings stemmed from appeals filed by Vijayan, his daughter Veena T, and her husband P A Mohamed Riyas, who are seeking authorization to challenge the single judge's ruling. Highlighting judicial procedure, the bench explained that the petitions must first be formally numbered and admitted before an interim stay can be evaluated.
During the morning session, the bench questioned the state government regarding its decision to order a preliminary inquiry after the Enforcement Directorate had already shared information regarding alleged offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act involving Vijayan, Veena, and Riyas. Advocate General Jaju Babu responded that the state initiated the inquiry to verify the information provided by the federal agency, noting that the ED had not handed over substantial related material to the state police.
In their legal challenge, the appellants contended that the single judge issued the directive to register the FIR without granting them a hearing. The division bench subsequently questioned the appellants on why they had not directly challenged the filed FIR, while also raising the broader question of whether an accused party is entitled to a hearing prior to the registration of an FIR in criminal matters.
Attorneys representing the appellants argued that a pre-decisional hearing was necessary because the matter arose from a writ petition and the resulting judicial directives directly impacted them. They emphasized that the situation deviated from a standard police-initiated FIR and maintained that challenging the FIR directly proved difficult once ordered by the High Court.
Furthermore, the appellants claimed that the underlying petition handled by the single judge functioned essentially as a public interest litigation and ought to have been addressed by a division bench designated for PIL matters. The appeals materialized after the Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau's Special Investigation Unit-1 registered two FIRs on Monday against Vijayan and his family members following the October 9 High Court directive based on the ED's report.
The federal financial probe agency had urged law enforcement to initiate a criminal case using evidence compiled during money laundering investigations. The agency asserts that Cochin Minerals and Labours Limited executed fraudulent payments totaling Rs 2.78 crore to Veena's inactive enterprise, Exalogic Solutions, under the pretext of providing information technology consultancy services. With the division bench reserving its decision on the appeal applications, the litigation remains paused pending the court's ruling on whether the appeals can proceed.