Kerala HC Orders FIR Against Pinarayi Vijayan in CMRL-Exalogic Case

The Kerala High Court on Friday, October 9, ordered the Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau (VACB) to register an FIR in the CMRL-Exalogic case, naming former Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan, his daughter T. Veena and her husband, former minister P.A. Mohammed Riyas, among the suspects. Justice A. Badharudeen set aside the state government's decision to hold a preliminary inquiry first and ruled that the material sent by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) was enough to start a criminal case.

The order is one of the biggest legal setbacks so far for the veteran CPI(M) leader, who is no longer Chief Minister. Vijayan and Riyas have denied any wrongdoing, and none of the allegations have been proven in court.

What the High Court decided

The petition was filed by advocate K.M. Shajahan, who once worked as additional private secretary to the late V.S. Achuthanandan. He challenged the government's move to set up a Crime Branch Special Investigation Team to "examine" the ED's findings instead of registering an FIR. The court found that he had the standing to approach it as a citizen and whistle-blower, and allowed his plea.

According to legal news reports of the order, the court made three key directions:

1. The Director of the Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau must register an FIR against all suspected persons on the basis of the ED's information.
2. The DGP or the head of the Crime Branch SIT must promptly hand over that information to the VACB Director.
3. The ED must forward all the documents needed for the investigation to the VACB.

The judge reasoned that the alleged offences fall under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, which makes the Vigilance bureau the competent agency. Where information shared under Section 66(2) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) discloses offences the state police can register, registering an FIR is obligatory, the court held. A preliminary inquiry is not needed in every corruption case, and in this case the ED's communication already contained detailed material.

The state's argument

Advocate General K. Jaju Babu had argued that the petition was really a private writ dressed up as public interest litigation, and that information from the ED does not take away a state agency's power to decide independently whether a case deserves an FIR. The government had cited legal advice and the Supreme Court's rulings in the Lalita Kumari and Vijay Madanlal Choudhary cases to justify its preliminary inquiry. The ED's counsel argued the opposite: that the police had no discretion to delay an FIR once the agency flagged scheduled offences.

The choice of the Crime Branch rather than the Vigilance bureau had already drawn criticism, since anti-corruption cases normally go to the VACB. Friday's order effectively moves the probe there.

Background: what is the CMRL-Exalogic case?

The case revolves around payments made by Cochin Minerals and Rutile Ltd (CMRL), a private mineral sands company, to Exalogic Solutions Pvt Ltd, an IT firm owned by Veena. The ED alleges that the payments were not backed by any actual services and were part of a larger bribery arrangement aimed at Vijayan, who was Chief Minister at the time.

As reported from the ED's communication, about Rs 2.78 crore was credited to Veena's personal account and Rs 50 lakh to Exalogic's account, taking the total to roughly Rs 3.28 crore. The agency has also cited a statement by former CMRL chief financial officer P. Sureshkumar linking the payments to Veena's connection with her father. In a separate strand, the ED has alleged that money was moved abroad through hawala channels by associates of Riyas in 2024 and 2025. These remain the agency's allegations and are yet to be tested in any trial.

Key facts at a glance

Why this matters for Kerala politics

In Kerala the matter is popularly known as the "masappadi" (monthly payment) case, and it has been a political flashpoint for a long time. For the CPI(M), an FIR against its tallest leader and a former minister from the same family is a major headache. For the state government, the order raises uncomfortable questions about why it chose a preliminary inquiry instead of moving straight to a case, a decision the court has now overturned.

For ordinary readers, the larger legal takeaway is significant: the ruling says that when a central agency like the ED formally shares material pointing to corruption offences, state police cannot simply sit on it. That principle could shape how similar referrals are handled in other states.

What happens next

The VACB is now expected to register the FIR and begin its investigation once it receives the ED's documents. Registration of an FIR only marks the start of a criminal probe; it does not mean anyone has been found guilty. Those named are free to challenge the order before a Division Bench of the High Court or the Supreme Court, and an appeal from the state or the accused would not be surprising. The ED's own money-laundering proceedings continue separately.

ViralDose will update this story as the FIR is registered and the parties respond.

Also Read

• Supreme Court Orders Fresh Polls in 50 Punjab Municipal Wards
• FIR Against Rahul, Priyanka Gandhi Over Akashvani Bhavan Entry
• GST Council Scraps Arrest Powers, Raises Prosecution Limit to Rs 5 Cr