E-Paper
HC order to file FIR passed without hearing me: Pinarayi Vijayan tells SC
Pinarayi Vijayan’s petition is scheduled to be heard on Wednesday by a vacation bench of justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana
Prefer HTon Google
Former Kerala chief minister Pinarayi Vijayan has told the Supreme Court that the Kerala high court order directing the registration of a criminal case against him was passed without hearing him and in the absence of any material linking him to the alleged Cochin Minerals and Rutile Limited (CMRL)-Exalogic payoff case.
His petition is scheduled to be heard on Wednesday by a vacation bench of justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana. Vijayan said the only link connecting him to the case was that his daughter was a director of Exalogic Solutions.
The petition was mentioned last week before Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant, who agreed to constitute a vacation bench as the court is closed for a week for the Dusshera break. Senior advocate Siddharth Luthra, who mentioned the matter, pointed out that the 81-year-old former Kerala CM feared arrest on mere suspicion.
The hearing is significant because the Enforcement Directorate (ED) has summoned Vijayan on October 23 in connection with the money laundering probe based on the same set of allegations linked to the corruption case.
Following the high court order, Kerala’s Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau (VACB) has booked Vijayan, his daughter Veena and son-in-law and CPI(M) MLA PA Mohammed Riyas under the Prevention of Corruption (PC) Act. They have also filed separate appeals against the order registering the FIR.
Vijayan said he was named in the FIR, though he was not linked to either Cochin Minerals and Rutile Limited (CMRL), a state-run minerals manufacturer, or the former IT firm Exalogic Solutions Ltd, in which his daughter was a director. CMRL is alleged to have paid ₹2.72 crore to the private firm without providing any services between 2017 and 2020.
The former chief minister has sought setting aside the high court order, pointing out that the same set of allegations were raised in an earlier round of litigation that was dismissed up to the Supreme Court in October 2025.
“On merits, there is absolutely no material against the petitioner. No demand, acceptance, official act or money trail is alleged. The only link is a retracted statement and the petitioner’s relationship with his daughter. The very same allegations ended in dismissal at every stage, up to this court,” his petition said.
The high court order was passed on a petition filed by a lawyer KM Shajahan who wrote to the state government seeking registration of a criminal case against Vijayan and others on September 22. This move came after ED on September 7 asked the state police to probe allegations of irregular payment by the state-run firm to Exalogic. The decision to conduct an enquiry was taken on September 22, the same day when Shajahan wrote to the state seeking registration of FIR.
On September 23, the state constituted a special team to conduct a preliminary enquiry. The following day, Shajahan approached the Kerala high court to seek a FIR against Vijayan.
A single judge bench on October 9 allowed the prayer after calling for a report from ED in a sealed cover. This order was challenged before a division bench of the high court which dismissed the appeal on October 15.
VIjayan said he was not made a party to the high court proceedings, had never been a shareholder, director or employee of Exalogic, and had had no dealings with CMRL.
The veteran Communist Party of India (Marxist) leader said the same allegation had been made earlier, was examined and rejected at every level. Two complaints seeking a vigilance investigation were rejected by the trial courts concerned on a private complaint filed in 2023. The matter was taken to the high court which held in March 2025 that the allegations “at the most triggered a suspicion”. This conclusion was challenged before the top court which upheld the HC order on October 6, 2025, his petition said.
Vijayan also challenged Shajahan’s right to seek registration of an FIR as a complete stranger to the case and pointed to the speed at which the authorities had moved, claiming that the case was driven by political vendetta.
“A court cannot direct registration of an FIR against a person without impleading and hearing him…The writ petition was premature. It was filed while the state was already acting on the information. It was also motivated by extraneous reasons,” Vijayan stated in his appeal.
He further alleged that the petition was in substance a public interest litigation and ought to have been listed before a two-judge bench headed by the high court’s chief justice. Despite this objection raised by the high court registry, the single-judge bench heard and decided the matter, Vijayan told the top court in his appeal.
In January 2017, CMRL engaged Vijayan’s daughter as an IT and marketing consultant on a retainership basis. However, during the tax assessment for the years 2013-14 to 2019-20 submitted by CMRL revealed additional payouts given to Exalogic without providing any services. Vijayan said CMRL later explained the payments.
