Kerala High Court dismisses Cong MLA Kuzhalnadan's plea against Kerala CM's daughter's firm

A court dismissed a request for a court-monitored probe into alleged financial dealings between a private mining company and the defunct IT firm of CM Vijayan's daughter. The court hearing followed a previous dismissal of a similar plea by a social activist. Despite controversy over reported payments to the CM's daughter, no evidence has emerged to support allegations of wrongdoing. A revision petition on the matter is pending in the High Court.

A vigilance court here on Monday dismissed the petition filed by Congress MLA Mathew Kuzhalnadan seeking a court-monitored probe into the alleged financial transactions between a private mining company and the now-defunct IT company of T Veena, the daughter of Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan.

Kuzhalnadan had initially approached the Special Vigilance Court here, saying the Vigilance Department refused to probe the financial transactions between Cochin Minerals and Rutile Ltd. (CMRL) and Veena's company Exalogic.

Later, he changed his stance and sought a court-monitored probe into the alleged financial transactions.

The court dismissed the plea after a detailed hearing on the documents submitted by the Congress legislator.

Meanwhile, Kuzhalnadan said the order was unexpected and will take further action after going through the judgement.

Earlier, a Vigilance Special Court, Muvattupuzha, had dismissed a plea by a social activist for an investigation into the alleged illegal financial transactions between CMRL, Veena's firm, and the suspected political leaders for want of evidence.

The High Court is currently hearing a revision petition challenging that order in the matter.

A controversy had erupted in Kerala after media reports that the CMRL had paid a total of Rs 1.72 crore to the CM's daughter between 2017 and 2020.

The reports cited the ruling of an interim board for settlement and said that CMRL previously had an agreement with Veena's IT firm for consulting and software support services.

It was also alleged that though 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 also cited findings by the Registrar of Companies (ROC) against her firm.

Quoting the ROC report, the Congress-led UDF opposition claimed that offences of receiving money using false documents and without providing services had been committed by Veena's firm.

(This story has not been edited by Devdiscourse staff and is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)