Kochi, September 29, 2026 (Yes Punjab News)
The Kerala High Court on Tuesday reserved its verdict on a plea seeking registration of an FIR against Leader of Opposition Pinarayi Vijayan, his daughter Veena Vijayan and son-in-law Mohammed Riyas, a former state minister and currently a CPI(M) legislator, in the CMRL-Exalogic case.
Justice A. Badharudeen reserved the verdict after hearing detailed arguments from the parties on the plea, which seeks a case under the Prevention of Corruption Act over alleged financial transactions between Cochin Minerals and Rutile Ltd (CMRL) and Veena Vijayan’s company, Exalogic Solutions.
The plea was filed by advocate K.M. Shahjahan, who sought the registration of an FIR based on information furnished by the Enforcement Directorate (ED), which had gathered material during its investigation into the alleged transactions.
The state government opposed the plea, arguing that an FIR could not be registered without a preliminary inquiry into the allegations. The Advocate General submitted that the principal material relied upon by the ED was a diary and argued that an FIR could not be registered solely on that basis.
The government also contended that the plea was not maintainable and that a preliminary inquiry was necessary before initiating a criminal case.
During the hearing, the High Court pointed out that the ED had submitted statements along with other material in support of its findings.
The ED produced before the court a letter sent to the Director General of Police recommending registration of a case against Vijayan and Riyas. The agency also submitted material, including statements recorded during its inquiry, and maintained that the information contained in its letter was sufficient to register an FIR.
The court sought to know whether the statements had been furnished to the state government. The ED informed the court that complete copies of the statements had not been handed over, but said it was willing to provide them if required by the police.
The agency reiterated that a case should be registered on the basis of the material already submitted and maintained that the information in its communication was adequate to initiate action.
The state government, however, argued that the ED was not an investigating agency like the police and that its role was limited to collecting information and taking further action within its statutory jurisdiction.
The High Court observed that the ED was an investigating agency and reserved its verdict on whether the state police could be directed to register an FIR without conducting a preliminary inquiry.
Meanwhile, an Special Investigation Team (SIT) has already been constituted by the state government led by Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan, following the ED’s letter to the state police chief.
FOLLOW NOW
