Ajith Kumar argued that a detailed vigilance probe found no evidence of disproportionate assets and sought to set aside the lower court's order.
Published Aug 26, 2025 | 4:33 PM ⚊ Updated Aug 26, 2025 | 4:33 PM
The Kerala High Court has raised sharp concerns over the investigation into ADGP M.R. Ajith Kumar's alleged disproportionate assets, questioning why a subordinate officer, rather than a senior official, conducted the probe.
Synopsis: Questioning the propriety of a subordinate officer handling such a high-profile case, the High Court directed that the DGP be kept informed of all developments. The court has also sought detailed explanations from the Vigilance Director regarding the investigation procedures.
The Kerala High Court has raised concerns over the investigation into ADGP MR Ajith Kumar’s alleged disproportionate assets, questioning why a subordinate officer, rather than a senior, conducted the probe.
The remarks came while the court was hearing Kumar’s appeal challenging the Vigilance Court’s rejection of a clean-chit report.
Kumar argued that a detailed vigilance probe found no evidence of disproportionate assets and sought to set aside the lower court’s order.
The High Court, however, questioned the propriety of a subordinate officer handling such a high-profile case and directed that the DGP be kept informed of all developments.
The court has also sought detailed explanations from the Vigilance Director regarding the investigation procedures.
Meanwhile, controversy continues over Kumar’s role during the Thrissur Pooram festival, with reports flagging serious lapses in management. Former police chief Shaik Darvesh Sahib had recommended strict action, and the report was forwarded to the government for the new DGP’s opinion.
Sources said Kumar had sought the advice of senior lawyers and argued that the lower court’s order contradicted Supreme Court rulings. Meanwhile, the state government had also obtained a legal opinion to approach the High Court, seeking the removal of certain observations made against Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan in the same order.
The vigilance court had questioned the chief minister’s approval of a clean chit to Kumar and raised doubts about the extent of administrative intervention in vigilance inquiries.
Its remarks were based on a statement by former Vigilance Director Yogesh Gupta, who said the chief minister had approved the clean chit to Kumar.
The court had noted that while the vigilance department is under the chief minister’s control, this authority could not extend to interfering in investigations. It had also questioned whether the government would have approved the report if its findings were adverse.
Legal experts argued that the vigilance court’s order violated apex court precedents by initiating a probe without mandatory government sanction, pointing out that the Supreme Court had recently stayed similar cases in other states.
Vigilance Director Manoj Abraham had forwarded the Legal Adviser’s report recommending action to the Home and Vigilance Secretary for follow-up. The High Court, after hearing the arguments, passed its order.
The Kerala government has taken an unusual move in favour of Kumar. Two reports earlier submitted by former DGP Sahib, one concerning the disruption during Thrissur Pooram and another based on a complaint filed by ADGP P. Vijayan, were returned without any follow-up action.
Instead, the government instructed the current DGP, Ravada Chandrasekhar, to reassess the issues and submit a fresh report. The Vigilance Court had earlier criticised that the report was filed only after obtaining the chief minister’s approval.
On 14 August, Manoj A, Enquiry Commissioner and Special Judge (Vigilance), Thiruvananthapuram, rejected the VACB report and strongly criticised the inquiry officers. The court questioned how the officer dismissed the allegations without establishing a check period or evaluating Kumar’s income, expenses, and savings.
The order stated that the report appeared designed to favour the officer and lacked a legal basis.
The Vigilance Director had forwarded the report in March 2025, claiming departmental verification and the chief minister’s approval, which the court said was unnecessary and an interference.
The probe had been ordered in September 2024 on the State Police Chief’s recommendation, following a complaint by former MLA PV Anvar, who alleged that Kumar, along with his wife and brothers, was constructing a luxury house worth crores on 22 cents in Kowdiar, an upmarket area in Thiruvananthapuram.
In May 2025, VACB’s Special Investigation Unit-I reported the allegations as baseless, noting that Kumar and his family owned 80.21 cents in Thrissur and Thiruvananthapuram valued at ₹8.77 crore, with the new house costing about ₹3.58 crore.
It recorded Kumar’s monthly salary at ₹2.33 lakh and a home loan of ₹1.5 crore, concluding the complaint was false.
(Edited by Majnu Babu).
