Kerala: Court rejects petition seeking vigilance inquiry against CM Pinarayi Vijayan and his daughter

The court said apart from the general allegations made, the complainant has not furnished any material facts which will show that the political leaders made favours to the CMRL in their capacity as public servants in return for the alleged payments.

Ernakulam: A court here on Saturday dismissed a plea seeking a vigilance inquiry against Kerala Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan, his daughter and some other political leaders in connection with alleged financial transactions between a private mineral company and her IT firm. Muvattupuzha Special Vigilance Court judge NV Raju dismissed the petition filed by social activist Gireesh Babu for want of evidence.

The petition sought an investigation into the "illegal financial transactions, coming under the ambit of bribery, carried out between the accused persons," in connection with mining and other "business interests" of Cochin Minerals and Rutile Ltd (CMRL). Apart from Vijayan and his daughter Veena T, the petition had also arraigned former leader of Opposition in the Assembly and senior Congress leader, Ramesh Chennithala, Indian Union Muslim League leaders PK Kunhalikutty and VK Ibrahimkunju, Veena's IT firm, CMRL and others as the accused.

A controversy erupted in Kerala after a Malayalam daily recently reported that the CMRL had paid a total of Rs 1.72 crore to the CM's daughter between 2017 and 2020. The court said apart from the general allegations levelled, the complainant has not furnished any material facts which will show that the political leaders made favours to the CMRL in their capacity as public servants in return for the alleged payments. The court also noted that the order of the Interim Board for Settlement dated June 12, 2023 "do not show a prima facie case of commission of any offences" punishable under the Prevention of Corruption Act.

"As the complaint and the materials produced, along with the complaint do not disclose sufficient material facts which will show that any of the respondents have committed any offences punishable under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, this complaint is liable to be rejected," the court said in its order.

It said nothing was disclosed in the complaint to show that the payment to Veena and her company by CMRL was towards any particular favours or benefits received by it from the Chief Minister. "There is no allegation that the 2nd respondent (CM) had dealt with any matters pertaining to the 8th respondent (CMRL) and had shown any favours to the 8th respondent (CMRL) by abusing his official position," the order read.

The news report in the Malayalam daily cited the ruling of an interim board for settlement and said that the CMRL previously had an agreement with Veena's IT firm for consultancy and software support services.

Despite the fact that no service was rendered by her firm, the amount was paid on a monthly basis "due to her relationship with a prominent person," the report added. (PTI)