Published Jul 24, 2026 | 4:25 PM ⚊ Updated Jul 24, 2026 | 4:25 PM
M.R. Ajithkumar IPS
Synopsis: Senior IPS officer M R Ajithkumar’s suspension is nothing but a fall from favour. The UDF government has suspended him over allegations that he influenced the Navakerala Sadas assault investigation to shield members of former Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan’s security team, marking a dramatic reversal in a career already shadowed by controversy. One of the most influential officers under the previous Left government, the suspension also shatters M.R. Ajithkumar’s DGP ambitions.
Just when senior IPS officer M.R. Ajithkumar was widely expected to figure in the race for elevation to the Director General of Police (DGP) rank, his career took a dramatic and damaging turn on Friday, 24 July.
The officer, long regarded by critics as the “blue-eyed boy” of former chief minister Pinarayi Vijayan, was placed under suspension by the UDF government on Friday over allegations that, as ADGP (Law & Order), he pressured subordinate officers to alter the course of the investigation into the 2023 Nava Kerala Sadas assault case to shield members of the then CM’s security team.
The suspension, which came a day after reports of the impending action surfaced on Thursday night, is expected to cast a shadow over the officer’s prospects of promotion to the DGP rank.
Ajithkumar remained one of Kerala’s most controversial police officers in recent times, facing a string of serious allegations, even as he continued to enjoy the confidence of the LDF government.
Despite intense political criticism over serious allegations levelled by former Nilambur MLA P.V. Anwar, meetings with RSS general secretary Dattatreya Hosabale and BJP leader Ram Madhav, and his alleged role in the Thrissur Pooram controversy, Ajit Kumar had remained protected by the Pinarayi Vijayan-led government.
Also Read: Curious case of CPI(M)’s ‘You-Know-Who’ and a delayed weekend edition
The suspension stems from findings that the probe into the Nava Kerala Sadas assault case was allegedly steered away from its original course to shield members of former chief minister Pinarayi Vijayan’s security and escort team, ultimately resulting in a refer report that allowed the accused to evade prosecution.
Though reports of the government’s decision to suspend Ajithkumar surfaced late on Thursday, the formal order was issued on Friday.
The officer, who is currently serving as Chairman and Managing Director of the Kerala State Beverages Corporation, has been placed under suspension pending disciplinary proceedings under the All India Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1969.
The government action is based on the findings of the Special Investigation Team (SIT), the report submitted by the Director General of Police-cum-State Police Chief Ravada A. Chandrasekhar, and Ajithkumar’s interim explanation.
According to the order, the SIT found that the course of investigation pursued by the original investigating officers was altered due to undue influence exerted from the office of the then ADGP. It alleged that the investigation was reshaped in a manner that eventually ended in the filing of a refer report, sparing the accused from legal action.
An excerpt from the report of the State Police Chief to the state government
The government noted that the allegations were not founded on a single complaint.
Instead, they were corroborated by statements recorded from three officers who had directly handled the investigation — Deputy Superintendent of Police Arun K.S., Deputy Superintendent of Police Sunilraj and Inspector K.P. Tomson.
Tomson told the SIT that during a meeting, the then ADGP examined the case diary, expressed dissatisfaction with the direction of the investigation and questioned the findings that pointed to the involvement of members of the former CM’s security and escort team in the incident.
The statements of Arun K.S. and Sunilraj echoed similar allegations of intervention.
Sunilraj specifically referred to communications conveyed through the Superintendent of Police stating that “the CM PSO case may be referred by tomorrow” and “I think investigation is over and only pending for refer notice,” indicating sustained efforts to influence the outcome of the probe.
The SIT further reported that Gireesh, a Grade Sub-Inspector attached to the then ADGP’s office, and Sreekanth, a Sub-Inspector in the same office, played significant roles during the investigation that eventually culminated in the filing of the refer report.
Also Read: Who owns the wealth beneath the land? The constitutional battle has begun
After examining the SIT findings, the DGP’s report and Ajithkumar’s explanation, the government concluded that the allegations were supported by multiple officers who had first-hand knowledge of the investigation.
The suspension order acknowledges that Section 36 of the Code of Criminal Procedure empowers senior police officers to supervise investigations by exercising the powers of a Station House Officer.
However, it states that such supervision must be exercised strictly within the framework of law and with the objective of ensuring justice.
In Ajithkumar’s case, the government held that his intervention was neither lawful nor impartial. Instead, it concluded that the interference caused injustice to the victims while protecting the accused from legal consequences.
Citing the seriousness of the allegations, the senior position held by the officer, the possibility that his continuance in office could affect the fairness of the disciplinary inquiry, and the larger public interest in preserving the integrity of the police administration, the government ordered his suspension.
Also Read: Kerala minister who whipped up a row and left everyone hungry for answers
Responding to a memo issued by the DGP, Ajithkumar in an explanation submitted on 21 July, denied allegations that he improperly interfered in the investigation, questioned the findings of the SIT, and sought additional records before submitting a detailed reply.
In his explanation, Ajithkumar contended that the SIT had exceeded its mandate while arriving at its conclusions. He also sought an opportunity to cross-check the statements of police officers recorded by the SIT.
Ajith Kumar had maintained that he was in Wayanad overseeing landslide rescue operations when the alleged manipulation of the case diary took place and denied being personally present at the office.
In addition, he requested a copy of the report submitted by the then Alappuzha District Police Chief on 5 January, 2024, recommending disciplinary action against policemen involved in the incident. He maintained that he would be in a position to furnish a detailed reply only after receiving those documents.
However, the DGP found his explanation unsatisfactory and recommended further action against the officer.
The DGP said there was no need at this stage to permit cross-verification of the statements recorded by the SIT and observed that the allegations of undue influence on the investigation were serious in nature.
The Police Chief, in his report to the government, recommended that appropriate action be initiated against Ajithkumar in view of the findings and the gravity of the allegations.
Also Read: Vizhinjam Seaport’s ₹219-crore question: Waiver, win-win or political spin?
On 18 May, when the V D Satheesan led UDF government convened its first Cabinet meeting, one of the decisions it took was ordering a fresh investigation into the alleged assault on Youth Congress and KSU workers during the Navakerala Sadas programme in Alappuzha in December 2023.
It reopened a case in which the Crime Branch had earlier cleared the accused police personnel of wrongdoing.
The incident occurred on 15 December, 2023, when Youth Congress and Kerala Students Union activists allegedly tried to stage a protest near the convoy of the then Chief Minister in Alappuzha. The officials named in the case are Pinarayi Vijayan’s then gunman Anil Kumar and police officer Sandeep S.
Following the incident, the Alappuzha South police registered a case, under Sections 325 (voluntarily causing grievous hurt), 324 (voluntarily causing hurt by dangerous weapons or means) and 294(b) of the Indian Penal Code.
The Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Alappuzha, later directed the police to formally register the case and carry out an investigation.
Among those allegedly assaulted was Thomas A.D., then KSU district president, who was elected to the Assembly in the 2026 elections.
After taking over the investigation, the Crime Branch filed a final report before the Alappuzha magistrate court in 2024, giving a clean chit to the two officers. It concluded that they had acted in the course of their official duty by stopping Youth Congress-KSU activists Ajay Jewel Kuriakose and Thomas A.D. from rushing towards the vehicle of the then Chief Minister, who was under Z-plus security cover.
The Crime Branch sought to classify the case as a “mistake of fact” and requested that it be closed. The magistrate court, however, rejected the closure report and ordered a further investigation.
Although a follow-up probe was initiated, little headway was made.
The new Cabinet decided to hand over the entire case to an SIT, asking it to examine the alleged assault, the conduct of the security personnel and the findings of the earlier Crime Branch investigation.
Despite that the UDF government also faced criticism as allegations cropped up that it is delaying action against Ajithkumar.
On 22 July, Chief Minister V.D. Satheesan dismissed allegations that the government was delaying action on the inquiry against Ajithkumar to facilitate his promotion. Addressing the post-Cabinet media briefing, he said the inquiry report had reached the State Police Chief only the previous week and would be examined before being forwarded to the Home Department for the government’s decision. He also rejected claims that the government was shielding the officer.
A day after the Chief Minister’s remarks, the suspension recommendation in the case surfaced, and on 24 July the government issued the formal suspension order, seeking to counter the charge that it was slow in acting against the senior officer.
Meanwhile, an advocate practicing in the Kerala High Court has sought criminal action against suspended ADGP M.R. Ajithkumar.
In a complaint addressed to the Chief Minister, advocate Kulathoor Jaisingh argued that the findings of the inquiry, which led to Ajithkumar’s suspension disclose offences that warrant criminal prosecution and not merely departmental disciplinary action.
He urged the government to direct the State Police Chief to register a criminal case and initiate further legal proceedings.
The Chief Minister’s Office replied that the complaint had been noted and forwarded to the Home Minister for appropriate action.
(Edited by Fayisa CA)
