Full Breakdown
Supreme Court Stays Investigation in CMRL-Exalogic Bribery Case Involving Pinarayi Vijayan
By Drooid · · How we work
Core Event
On October 21 2026 the Supreme Court, sitting as a vacation bench of Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana, set aside a Kerala High Court division-bench order that had refused former chief minister Pinarayi Vijayan, his daughter Veena T and son-in-law P. A. Mohamed Riyas leave to appeal a single-judge direction to register an FIR in the alleged INR278-crore CMRL-Exalogic payoff case. The apex court stayed the vigilance investigation for seven days while allowing the petitioners to approach the division bench on the merits.
Background & Context
The Enforcement Directorate (ED) submitted a report to Kerala police alleging that CMRL made fraudulent payments to Exalogic Solutions, previously directed by Veena T, for purported IT consultancy services. The ED sought registration of a case under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and Section 66(2) of the PMLA. The state government initially ordered a preliminary inquiry by a special investigation team (SIT) rather than filing an FIR. Activist-lawyer K. M. Shajahan filed a petition in the High Court on September 22 2026, prompting a single-judge bench to direct the Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau (VACB) to register an FIR on October 9 2026.
Timeline
- Sept 7 2026 – ED asks state police to probe alleged irregular payment.
- Sept 22 2026 – Lawyer K. M. Shajahan files petition seeking FIR registration.
- Oct 9 2026 – Single-judge High Court bench orders VACB to register FIR.
- Oct 15 2026 – Division bench rejects petitioners’ appeal; reiterates no right to be heard before FIR.
- Oct 21 2026 – Supreme Court stays the vigilance investigation for a week and permits appeal to division bench.
- Oct 23 2026 (scheduled) – ED summons Vijayan for questioning under the PMLA.
Data & Statistics
- Alleged payment: INR278 crore (multiple sources).
- FIRs: Two FIRs were registered by VACB following the High Court order.
- Investigation stay: seven-day interim relief granted by the Supreme Court.
Official Statements & Responses
The Supreme Court emphasized that the FIR remains in force but the investigation cannot proceed until the legal questions raised by the petitioners are resolved. The Kerala High Court division bench reiterated its view that an accused does not have a right to be heard before an FIR is filed. The state’s Law Department, led by Chief Minister V. Satheesan, defended the decision to conduct a preliminary enquiry, describing it as a “Cabinet decision.” The ED maintains that its report contains sufficient material to justify prosecution under the PMLA.
Criticism & Opposition
Congress leaders expressed concern over the stay, arguing it could impede accountability.
Conflicting Reports & Gaps
Sources differ on the monetary value: The Hindu reports INR278 crore, while other outlets cite Rs 2.78 crore. It is unclear whether this reflects a typographical error or separate components of the alleged transaction. The Supreme Court’s order leaves unresolved whether the ED’s recommendation under Section 66(2) of the PMLA obligates the state to register an FIR.
What’s Next
The petitioners will present their merits before the Kerala High Court division bench. The Supreme Court’s stay remains in effect for a week; the VACB may resume its probe thereafter unless further relief is granted. The scheduled ED summons on October 23 2026 will proceed unless the appellate process alters the procedural posture.