Thiruvananthapuram, September 15, 2026 (Yes Punjab News)
The standoff between the Crime Branch and the Kerala Public Service Commission (PSC) over the questioning of its members in the Planning Board examination irregularities case is set to intensify, with the investigating agency preparing to reiterate that the members must appear at its headquarters for questioning.
Sources familiar with the developments said the Crime Branch is likely to write to the PSC members, making it clear that they are required to appear before the agency and record their statements.
The move follows the PSC’s communication that its members would not appear at the Crime Branch office but were willing to cooperate if investigators came to the Commission’s headquarters instead.
The dispute has increasingly become a question of authority between a constitutional recruitment body and a criminal investigation agency. The Crime Branch is understood to hold the view that the constitutional status of the PSC does not provide special protection to its chairman or members from being questioned as part of a criminal investigation.
The agency has also maintained that proceedings before a Legislative Assembly committee and a criminal investigation are distinct and cannot be treated on the same footing.
The PSC, meanwhile, has cited its constitutional status and protocol in resisting the summons. The Commission had adopted a similar position when its secretary was summoned by the Assembly Petitions Committee. The High Court subsequently ruled that the secretary was not required to appear, taking into account the constitutional status of the PSC.
The Crime Branch, however, is not treating that order as a restriction on its ongoing investigation.
The agency has registered a case into alleged irregularities in the Planning Board recruitment examination, although no person has so far been named as an accused. A Special Investigation Team headed by IG Ajitha Beegam is examining the role of PSC officials and members in the examination and selection process.
Questioning the Commission members is being considered a key next step. Investigators had initially decided to question the members involved in the process before recording the statement of PSC Chairman M.R. Baiju, who personally conducted the interview for the post.
The Crime Branch has already identified serious lapses in the evaluation process and sought action against officials found responsible. It has also sought a review of two appointments made on the basis of the controversial examination.
With the PSC refusing to appear at the Crime Branch headquarters and the agency preparing to reiterate its demand, the immediate issue is whether either side will soften its position.
If the standoff continues, the matter could eventually move into the legal arena. For the Crime Branch, accepting the PSC’s position could complicate its probe into the alleged examination irregularities. For the Commission, appearing before the police could set a precedent regarding how members of a constitutional body are questioned during criminal investigations.
The next communication from the Crime Branch could therefore determine whether the confrontation ends in compliance, negotiation or a fresh legal battle.
FOLLOW NOW
