Pinarayi Vijayan CMRL Case: Supreme Court stays investigation for 7 days in vigilance FIR

On October 9, a single-judge bench of the Kerala High Court directed the state Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau to register an FIR against Vijayan and others in the Cochin Minerals and Rutile Ltd (CMRL)-Exalogic case.

The Supreme Court on Wednesday stayed the investigation for 7 days in the FIR registered by Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau (VACB) against former Kerala chief minister Pinarayi Vijayan, his daughter and co-accused, Veena T, and son-in-law Muhammed Riyas in the Cochin Minerals and Rutile Ltd (CMRL)-Exalogic case. The court said that it had stayed the investigation to allow the petitioners to pursue the appeal before the division bench.

“We set aside the impugned order and allow the petitioners to pursue the appeal before the division bench and seek interim relief in accordance with the law.. To enable the petitioners to pursue the appeal, we direct the investigation in the impugned FIR shall remain stayed for 7 days…We are informed that a subsequent ECIR has been registered in respect of impugned FIR, we express no opinion with regard to its validity and keep it open to be agitated in appropriate proceedings if instituted in accordance with law,” the court said in its order.

Story continues below this ad

The court passed the order while hearing former Kerala chief minister Pinarayi Vijayan’s plea challenging a Kerala High Court order directing registration of FIR against him in the Cochin Minerals and Rutile Ltd (CMRL)-Exalogic case. A vacation bench comprising Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana heard the matter. Besides Vijayan, his daughter and co-accused, Veena T, and son-in-law Muhammed Riyas, have also approached the Supreme Court.

Kerala High Court’s order: On October 9, a single-judge bench of the Kerala High Court directed the state Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau to register an FIR against Vijayan, Veena, Riyas, and others over alleged illegal payments to Veena’s IT firm. The development came after the Enforcement Directorate, which is probing allegations that Veena’s firm, Exalogic Solutions, received illegal payments from Kochi-based CMRL when the CPI(M) was in power, recommended last month that the state police register an FIR against Vijayan and others under the Prevention of Corruption Act. A former minister, Riyas, is a member of the CPI(M) state secretariat. Subsequently, a division bench of the high court dismissed the plea of Vijayan and others seeking permission to appeal against the October 9 order.

Live Updates
Oct 21, 2026 12:32 PM IST
Pinarayi Vijayan CMRL Case Supreme Court Hearing Live: Investigation stayed for 7 days

Breaking- Supreme Court stays investigation for 7 days in FIR registered by Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau (VACB) against former Kerala chief minister Pinarayi Vijayan, his daughter and co-accused, Veena T, and son-in-law Muhammed Riyas. The court said that it had stayed the investigation to allow the petitioners to pursue the appeal before the division bench

Oct 21, 2026 12:27 PM IST
Pinarayi Vijayan CMRL Case Supreme Court Hearing Live: Order

Justice Bagchi: We have referred to Sub section 4 of Section 175 BNSS not in reference to merits of the case but to elucidate the expansive jurisdiction envisaged in the new code with regard to a potential accused prior to the registration of FIR and nothing more. That apart we are also minded to observe that the single judge has not only directed registration of FIR but also commencement of investigation...Commencement of investigation and taking the same to conclusion under PC Act would require due compliance of other statutory requirements under the special law...These facts clearly make out a prima facie case of locus for petitioners to seek leave to appeal against the impugned judgment...We set aside the impugned order and allow the petitioner to pursue the appeal before the division bench and seek interim relief in accordance with the law.. To enable the petitioners to pursue the appeal, we direct the investigation in the impugned FIR shall remain stayed for 7 days...We are informed that a subsequent ECIR has been registered in respect of impugned FIR, we express no opinion with regard to its validity and keep it open to be agitated in appropriate proceedings if instituted in accordance with law.

Oct 21, 2026 12:21 PM IST
Pinarayi Vijayan CMRL Case Supreme Court Hearing Live: Order

Justice Bagchi: This is not a case where on receipt of communication under section 66 (2) the state has registered a case on its own. On the contrary, the FIR and commencement of investigation were pursuant to a judicial order by the constitutional court. While passing such judicial order the single judge had observed that the materials in the communication by ED disclose cognizable offence and therefore it was obligatory for the state to register FIR. If the petitioners are not permitted to assail such finding of fact in the appellate proceedings, the same shall stare at their face in an independent proceeding assailing the first information report as per law. That apart the scheme with regard to registration of an FIR through judicial intervention under BNSS has undergone a change from what was envisaged under the Code of Criminal Procedure. In the erstwhile code, section 156, sub-section 3 did not require the participation of a form of a public servant or his superior in the process of taking a decision to issue direction for registration of FIR. However, Section 175 subsection 4 BNSS, such a requirement has been incorporated.

Oct 21, 2026 12:08 PM IST
Pinarayi Vijayan CMRL Case Supreme Court Hearing Live: Hearing underway

Justice Bagchi begins to dictate order. Court records the submissions of the counsels

Oct 21, 2026 12:03 PM IST
Pinarayi Vijayan CMRL Case Supreme Court Hearing Live: Hearing underway

Justice Bagchi: How far the words in Vijay Madan Lal Chhabra obliged to register an FIR has to be seen in respect of corruption cases. So, the question is whether these materials are making out a case of investigation under the scheme of the Prevention of Corruption Act as per law is something which the agency must look into. It cannot be said that you completely shut out the agency's prerogative.... We just want matter to go back to the division bench, apply its mind for purpose of investigation. We will keep the FIR. We are fully conscious of it.

Oct 21, 2026 12:01 PM IST
Pinarayi Vijayan CMRL Case Supreme Court Hearing Live: Hearing underway

Justice Bagchi: Did the public servant have the right to have his arguments heard on merits before shutting the door...

Oct 21, 2026 11:59 AM IST
Pinarayi Vijayan CMRL Case Supreme Court Hearing Live: Hearing underway

Justice Bagchi: We will maintain the FIR but no investigation until and unless these issues are decided by the appellate... Section 4 says even a person not accused of a scheduled offense can be an offender under PMLA. Mr Zoheb has full power to investigate hawala dealers, to investigate former chief ministers. Nothing stops him. He has done his statutory duty, intimated the state. Now it is for the state to act as per law. Whether the state is acting as per law, the High Court, according to us, could not have directed an investigation when it relies on Charanjeet Lal.

Oct 21, 2026 11:57 AM IST
Pinarayi Vijayan CMRL Case Supreme Court Hearing Live: Hearing begins

Justice Bagchi: We will not disturb the FIR but we will stall the investigation...It is not a court-directed investigation. It is a complaint. This is an ED request or PMLA request under 66(2) for which Charanjit Singh (judgment)...The single judge quotes Charanjit and passes an order contrary to Charanjit.

Oct 21, 2026 11:56 AM IST
Pinarayi Vijayan CMRL Case Supreme Court Hearing Live: Hearing begins

Justice Bagchi: We will set aside this order. We are not agreeing with the High Court on locus. We will send the matter back to the high court for adjudication.

Oct 21, 2026 11:55 AM IST
Pinarayi Vijayan CMRL Case Supreme Court Hearing Live: Hearing begins

Justice Bagchi: How can we sustain an order where the bench says that the FIR is a mere FIR and not against a specified person. The FIR is on the basis of a 66 2 notice which specifies the persons to be investigated as suspects. In such situation, if a person appeals against the direction for registration of FIR, not only FIR and investigation. Now, FIR is one thing, investigation is different.

Oct 21, 2026 11:54 AM IST
Pinarayi Vijayan CMRL Case Supreme Court Hearing Live: Hearing begins

Luthra:  Now this is a peculiar situation. I'll put it simply. A person who has no concern comes before the High Court and through the single judge decides without hearing me and thereafter brought in the division bench, I went for leave. It's a state, it's an appeal. It's Kerala's High Court....It was an appeal, and see the order that's been passed....82-year-old gentleman, where do we go?

Counsel for the state: I am for the state...The FIR is already registered...FIR is registered on the basis of the information sent by the ED under 69(2).

Justice Bagchi: There are two very important things to be decided here. First thing is whether 66(2) is a mandate. There, the single judge goes flip-flop. In one paragraph, he says that it's a mandate. In another paragraph, it says that there is some degree of verification necessary. And then goes into the facts and says, in this case there is no case because there are materials, overwhelming material.

Oct 21, 2026 11:50 AM IST
Pinarayi Vijayan CMRL Case Supreme Court Hearing Live: Hearing begins

Senior advocates Siddharth Luthra and N Hariharan are appearing in the matter.

Oct 21, 2026 11:50 AM IST
Pinarayi Vijayan CMRL Case Supreme Court Hearing Live: Hearing begins

Court takes up the matter.

Oct 21, 2026 10:36 AM IST
Pinarayi Vijayan CMRL Case Supreme Court Hearing Live: Bench assembles

Matter to be taken up shortly.

Oct 21, 2026 10:32 AM IST
Pinarayi Vijayan CMRL Case Supreme Court Hearing Live: Bench assembles

The two-judge bench has assembled.

Oct 21, 2026 10:19 AM IST
Pinarayi Vijayan CMRL Case Supreme Court Hearing Live: Senior Advocate Siddharth Luthra

Earlier, a bench of Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi said that it would consider constituting a bench during the Dussehra vacations. Appearing for Vijayan, senior advocate Siddharth Luthra had urged the bench to take it up, citing the risk of arrest. “The threat is because now the FIR is registered. All I am saying is, let him be protected, because that is my concern. Otherwise, an 82-year-old gentleman will be put in custody,” Luthra had told the bench before the court was closed for Dussehra vacations.

Oct 21, 2026 10:13 AM IST
Pinarayi Vijayan CMRL Case Supreme Court Hearing Live: What is the CMRL-Exalogic case?

The Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau (VACB) had booked Vijayan, his daughter Veena T, son-in-law Muhammed Riyas and others under the Prevention of Corruption Act days earlier, alleging that Cochin Minerals and Rutile Limited (CMRL) paid a bribe of Rs 3.28 crore to Veena’s IT firm, Exalogic Solutions, “disguised” as consultation charges. According to investigators, the payments were made when Vijayan was chief minister.

Latest Comment
Post Comment
Read Comments