The Supreme Court on Wednesday stayed further investigation for seven days in the CMRL-Exalogic alleged payment case involving former Kerala chief minister Pinarayi Vijayan, his daughter Veena T, his son-in-law, and others. A bench comprising Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V. Mohana, sitting during a special Dussehra vacation session, set aside an October 15 decision by the Kerala High Court division bench that had dismissed challenges to a single judge’s order mandating a criminal case and inquiry. While allowing the petitioners a seven-day window to seek remedies before the High Court, the top court clarified that the FIR itself has not been stayed, nor has it intervened in separate money-laundering proceedings initiated by the Enforcement Directorate.
Court Restricts ED to Statutory Limits
During the proceedings, the bench cautioned the Enforcement Directorate against overstepping its mandate, noting that the central agency must not interfere with the powers assigned to state authorities. The judges observed that while the agency had carried out its statutory obligation and was entitled to prosecute if a scheduled offence came to light, it must remain strictly within the boundaries set by law. The court stressed that investigative bodies must respect mutual jurisdictions and reiterated that no person is above the law, while adding that its remarks did not reflect a final view on the merits of the allegations against Vijayan and his family members.
Financial Transactions Involving Exalogic Under Scrutiny
The case arises from alleged financial transactions between Cochin Minerals and Rutile Limited, a Kerala-based firm, and Exalogic Solutions Private Limited, a firm owned by Veena T. It is alleged that CMRL transferred more than Rs 2.78 crore to Exalogic between 2017 and 2020 following an initial consultancy arrangement agreed in January 2017, despite an apparent absence of corresponding services. Documents submitted during tax assessments reportedly indicated additional payments without supporting service records, forming the core basis for the ongoing legal dispute.
High Court Directed to Examine Statutory Safeguards
Appearing for Vijayan, senior counsel argued that the initial directive ordering an FIR and subsequent probe was issued without affording the former chief minister an opportunity to be heard. The hearing also addressed procedural provisions, including Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act regarding prior sanctions for public servants, and Section 175(4) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita concerning pre-investigation hearings. With the Enforcement Directorate having issued an ECIR and summons for questioning on October 23, the Supreme Court declined to halt those distinct proceedings, directing the High Court division bench to consider the statutory issues and substantive appeals independently.
Follow for daily updates on cybercrime, corporate fraud, DFIR, hacking, investigations, and digital forensics
