Former Kerala Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan has approached the Supreme Court challenging the Kerala High Court's direction to register an FIR against him in the CMRL-Exalogic case, based on information provided by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) to the state police.

Senior advocate Siddharth Luthra mentioned the matter before Chief Justice of India Surya Kant on Friday, seeking an urgent hearing, citing the registration of an FIR and the possibility of coercive action against the CPM leader.

The Chief Justice said the matter could be listed on October 26 or 27, after the court reopens following the Dussehra break. When Luthra pressed for an urgent hearing, the CJI said he could consider listing it before a special bench during the vacation, subject to the availability of judges.

Luthra argued that Vijayan, 82, faced the threat of being taken into custody following the registration of the FIR. He also challenged the procedure adopted by the High Court, contending that a single judge had issued the direction in a writ petition resembling a public interest litigation despite not having the roster for PIL matters. He further argued that the direction was issued without hearing the accused and that a division bench had refused to entertain their appeal. Senior advocate N Hariharan also mentioned petitions filed by co-accused Veena T, Vijayan's daughter, and Mohammed Riyas, his son-in-law.

A single bench of the Kerala High Court had directed the Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau (VACB) to register an FIR under the Prevention of Corruption Act against Vijayan, Veena and Riyas. The order came on a writ petition filed by K M Shajahan.

The High Court had rejected the state's decision to order a preliminary inquiry into the allegations. It held that a preliminary inquiry was not warranted after the ED furnished information under Section 66(2) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA).

On Thursday, a division bench of the High Court refused to entertain the appeal filed by Vijayan, Veena and Riyas against the single bench's order. It observed that a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution can be filed to quash an FIR before a court takes cognisance of the offence. Once cognisance has been taken, the jurisdiction under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) can be invoked to seek the quashing of proceedings.The court further observed that a preliminary inquiry was not necessary when the information furnished under Section 66(2) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), 2002, was accompanied by sufficient material indicating the commission of cognisable offences.It also held that an accused in a corruption case had no legal right to be heard before an FIR was registered and could not demand a preliminary inquiry as a prerequisite to its registration.

The case concerns allegations that Cochin Minerals and Rutile Ltd (CMRL), a public company, paid a total of ₹1.72 crore in monthly instalments to Exalogic Solutions Pvt Ltd, associated with Veena, between 2017 and 2020 without receiving any actual services in return.

Earlier this year, the Kerala High Court dismissed pleas by CMRL officials seeking to quash the ED case. The ED said it had gathered evidence of alleged hawala transactions worth crores of rupees in the case and claimed that offences under the PMLA had also been committed. On September 7, the ED wrote to the Kerala Director General of Police seeking registration of an FIR under the Prevention of Corruption Act against Vijayan, Veena and Riyas. Subsequently, the state Home Secretary directed the State Police Chief to entrust the matter to the Crime Branch and constitute a Special Investigation Team to conduct a preliminary inquiry.
(With LiveLaw inputs.)