The Supreme Court on Wednesday stayed the investigation against former Kerala chief minister Pinarayi Vijayan, his daughter and son-in-law, among others, in the CMRL-Exalogic payoff case. It also reprimanded the Enforcement Directorate (ED), directing it to stay within its statutory limits and not meddle with powers of other agencies.
The high court had relied on a communication sent by the ED to the state police on September 22, disclosing a cognisable offence in the CMRL-Exalogic case. It was alleged that the state-owned CMRL paid more than ₹ 278 crore to Exalogic Solutions Pvt Ltd, a company wholly owned by Vijayan’s daughter, Veena T, without receiving any services in return.
In a special sitting held during the week-long Dussehra break, the Supreme Court allowed Vijayan and others to appeal against the single judge’s October 9 order. The court set aside the Kerala High Court division bench’s October 15 decision dismissing their appeal. The state had registered a first information report (FIR) on October 12 and was proceeding with the investigation. They argued that even the October 9 order directing the registration of an FIR and further investigation had been passed without hearing Vijayan.
“You (ED) have done your statutory duty. It is for the state to do its statutory duty. You have got a scheduled offence; you file a complaint and go ahead with your prosecution. Don’t extend your hands beyond the statutory limits. We are making it very clear. Don’t use your power to meddle with the statutory powers of other investigation agencies,” Justice Bagchi remarked when the ED defended the high court’s order. The top court stayed further investigation for seven days , allowing the petitioners to pursue their appeals against the Kerala High Court’s order directing the registration of a criminal case. A bench comprising Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V. Our order shall not be taken as an opinion expressed on the interim relief that the division bench (of the high court) shall fashion based on facts and the law. The court clarified that the registration of the FIR had not been stayed; only further investigation had been halted. Vijayan, represented by senior advocates Siddharth Luthra and N. Hariharan, submitted that the dismissal of his appeal had left him without an effective remedy.
Mohana said, “We direct the investigation in the FIR shall remain stayed for a week.
