Expelled, but CPM whistleblower Kunhikrishnan’s voice echoes in party's Payyannur Area Committee
Mail This Article
Kannur: Though the CPM has expelled whistleblower V Kunhikrishnan, his allegations and demands resurfaced at the party’s Payyannur Area Committee meeting on Friday.
The meeting was also marked by the controversial presence of Payyannur councillor-elect V K Nishad (35), who is out on parole after being sentenced to 20 years in prison last November.
K P Jyothi, a member of the All India Democratic Women’s Association (AIDWA) Kannur district committee, demanded that detailed accounts of three disputed funds be placed before the area committee and shared with lower-level party units, said party sources. Four members backed Jyothi, who is from Vellur, the same village as Kunhikrishnan.
The meeting was attended by CPM district secretary K K Ragesh and district secretariat member and Payyannur MLA T I Madhusoodanan, who is at the centre of all allegations. Madhusoodanan did not respond during the discussion.
Nishad objected to Jyothi’s demand. He reportedly argued that the issue had already been settled and reopening it would create hurdles for Madhusoodanan’s candidature. According to the sources, he said the accounts had been audited and presented when Kunhikrishnan himself was the area secretary.
Jyothi rejected the explanation, and the two reportedly clashed during the meeting, which ran from 7 pm to 9 pm. Nishad, a DYFI leader, is considered to be close to Madhusoodanan.
Kunhikrishnan had accused Madhusoodanan and his associate K P Madhu -- a former Payyannur Area Secretary and now a councillor -- of diverting money collected under three heads: the 2016 fund for the family of slain CPM worker C V Dhanaraj, the 2016 fund for constructing the Payyannur area committee office, and the 2021 Assembly election fund. Madhusoodanan was the area secretary when the two 2016 funds were raised and was the CPM candidate in 2021.
After pursuing the issue within the party for years, Kunhikrishnan went public with his findings while serving as a member of the CPM’s Kannur District Committee. The party expelled him. He later published a book, 'Nethruthwathe Anikal Thiruthanam' (The Rank Should Correct the Leadership), which sold out at its launch in Payyannur on February 4. The turnout at the event reflected the support his cause continues to command at the grassroots.
And now Jyothi’s intervention at the area committee meeting suggested that sections within the party remain unconvinced by the leadership’s claim that no money was lost from the three funds.
To be sure, Ragesh had earlier told the media that the party would be holding family meetings of party sympathisers and presenting the accounts before them.
In the 2021 Assembly election, Madhusoodanan secured 62 per cent of the vote in Payyannur, long regarded as a CPM stronghold. Kunhikrishnan’s allegations have since dented that standing.
Misuse of parole?
Nishad’s presence at the meeting -- more than his remarks -- triggered a controversy.
He was sentenced on November 25, 2025, to 20 years’ imprisonment for throwing a bomb at police officers on August 1, 2012. He was convicted after filing his nomination for the December local body elections, but before the withdrawal deadline. Despite fielding a dummy candidate, the CPM retained Nishad as its official nominee. He contested from prison, won, but has yet to take the oath.
Within a month of his imprisonment, Nishad was granted six days’ emergency leave for knee replacement surgery. The leave was extended for a month by the Deputy Inspector General (DIG) and later by the Home Department.
On a subsequent request, the prison superintendent denied leave, but the High Court granted it. The DIG extended it again. In the three months since sentencing, Nishad has spent more than a month out of prison.
During an earlier spell of leave, he was seen on camera bursting crackers and joining celebrations after Kunhikrishnan’s expulsion on January 26. Prison rules bar parolees from engaging in political activity or attending public gatherings. So far, Payyannur police have not reported any alleged violation of parole conditions to jail authorities.