Kochi: The FIRs had already been registered. On Monday, a division bench of the Kerala High Court put them in cold storage.
Justices K Natarajan and Johnson John stayed the October 9 order of a single judge that had directed the Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau to register a first information report against former chief minister Pinarayi Vijayan, his daughter Veena T and her husband P A Mohamed Riyas. The bench also stayed the FIRs the VACB went on to file, along with its investigation, until further orders. The matter will be heard after four weeks.
The appeals were admitted, with the court saying the questions needed detailed consideration.
The October 9 direction rested on a report from the Enforcement Directorate. The ED had written to the state police last month seeking an FIR, on the basis of evidence gathered during its probe into alleged payments by Cochin Minerals and Rutile Ltd and searches under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act. The state police chose to run a preliminary inquiry instead. Two FIRs were then registered in compliance with the court's order.
The VACB FIR alleges that Vijayan abused his official position and used corrupt and illegal means to secure financial benefits for himself, his daughter and her company. It says Veena and her now-defunct firm Exalogic Solutions received ₹3.28 crore from CMRL and Empower India Capital Investments Pvt Ltd through bank accounts, described as payment for IT consultancy and marketing services.
The ED opposed the appeals, arguing that the Supreme Court had stayed neither the VACB's FIR nor its own case, so no interim protection was warranted.
The procedural history matters. On October 15, the High Court refused Vijayan, Veena and Riyas permission to appeal against the single judge's order. They moved the Supreme Court, which on October 21 stayed the VACB investigation for a week and told them to go back to a division bench. The Supreme Court did not stay the ED's investigation, and that probe continues.
So the position on Monday evening is split. The state vigilance case is paused. The central money-laundering case is not. And the bench that paused one has said it wants four weeks to think about the rest.