Vigilance Court Rejects Kerala MLA's Plea for Probe Against Chief Minister and Daughter

Enquiry Commissioner and Special Judge Rajakumara M V rejected the petition filed by Congress MLA Mathew Kuzhalnadan and said necessary facts constituting corruption were absent in it.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 Veenas company, Exalogic.Later, he changed his stance and sought a court-monitored probe into the alleged financial transactions.Even if the facts stated in the complaint are accepted on face value, they do not constitute the offence alleged.

A Special Vigilance court here on Monday rejected a petition seeking an investigation against Kerala Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan over alleged financial transactions between a private mining company and the now-defunct IT company of his daughter, T Veena. Enquiry Commissioner and Special Judge Rajakumara M V rejected the petition filed by Congress MLA Mathew Kuzhalnadan and said necessary facts constituting corruption were absent in it.

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.

''Even if the facts stated in the complaint are accepted on face value, they do not constitute the offence alleged. Of course, there are allegations of corruption which have sprouted from certain suspicions and doubts entertained by the complainant. But allegations of such doubts and suspicions are not factual allegations constituting the offence,'' the court observed.

It said the crux of the allegation was that the CMRL had paid Rs 1.72 crore to Exalogic and Veena and this was a bribe paid to Vijayan for getting favours. ''I have gone through the entire record produced by the complainant. I could not find even a single scrap of paper which supports this contention,'' the court said.

The judge also noted that the benefit gained by the CMRL was not stated.

It said the complainant has no grievance regarding the alleged payments made to others. ''He has no case that all those who are alleged to have received payments have favoured the CMRL in any manner. He has not voiced any grievances as to other payments. He is also not seeking any investigation or enquiry against them. ''A question would naturally arise about why investigation or enquiry against A1 (Vijayan), A6 (Exalogic) and A7 (Veena) alone is sought. This would strengthen the argument that the complaint is politically motivated,'' the court said in its order.

The Congress has been targeting the Chief Minister, his daughter, and the CPI(M) over the allegations after a Malayalam daily reported that the CMRL had paid a total of Rs 1.72 crore to the CM's daughter between 2017 and 2020.

The report 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.''

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