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.
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 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.
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. “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 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. 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, the hearing is significant.
The very same allegations ended in dismissal at every stage, up to this court,” his petition said.
Two complaints seeking a vigilance investigation were rejected by the trial courts concerned on a private complaint filed in 2023. This conclusion was challenged before the top court which upheld the HC order on October 6, 2025, his petition said.
The veteran Communist Party of India (Marxist) leader said the same allegation had been made earlier, was examined and rejected at every level. The matter was taken to the high court which held in March 2025 that the allegations “at the most triggered a suspicion”.
