Published Oct 16, 2026 | 2:26 PM ⚊ Updated Oct 16, 2026 | 2:26 PM
An embattled trio: Veena, Pinarayi and Riyas. (File Photo)
Former Keralam Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan faces parallel investigations by the state Vigilance and the Enforcement Directorate (ED) in the CMRL-Exalogic financial transaction case, as the Supreme Court considers an early hearing of his plea challenging the Vigilance FIR.
The ED has summoned the current Leader of the Opposition for questioning next week. The Supreme Court has indicated that a special bench may hear his petition during the Dussehra holidays or list it for October 26.
A bench headed by Chief Justice Surya Kant said a special bench could be constituted next week to hear petitions filed by Pinarayi, his daughter Veena T, former Minister Mohammed Riyas and Hassan Waris challenging the Vigilance case.
The Chief Justice said the decision would depend on the availability of judges, noting that the existing benches were burdened with a heavy caseload. If the matter is not heard during the holidays, it will be listed on October 26, the court indicated.
Senior advocate Siddharth Luthra, appearing for Pinarayi, sought an urgent hearing and interim protection, citing the possibility of his client’s arrest. He also pointed to Pinarayi’s age, saying his client was 82.
The petitions challenge the legal basis of the Vigilance case, which was registered following an ED report on payments allegedly made by Cochin Minerals and Rutile Ltd (CMRL) to Exalogic Solutions, a company owned by Veena.
According to the ED report, CMRL made monthly payments exceeding Rs 3 lakh to Exalogic between 2017 and 2019 under a service agreement. Payments were allegedly made for IT and marketing consultancy services, with the total transfers amounting to Rs 3.28 crore.
The ED has alleged that the payments were made without any services being provided in return and effectively amounted to a bribe to Pinarayi.
The accused have disputed the allegations, arguing that the available material does not clearly establish what favour was allegedly extended to CMRL, who sought it, when it was granted or how it was linked to a specific financial transaction. They have also questioned whether the information relied on by the ED is sufficient to justify the registration of a criminal case.
A single-judge bench of the Kerala High Court had earlier ordered the registration of an FIR and an investigation into the allegations. Its Division Bench subsequently dismissed petitions challenging that order, prompting Pinarayi and the other accused to approach the Supreme Court seeking to quash the FIR.
The ED had earlier conducted two raids in connection with the case. Its summons to Pinarayi comes as he seeks to challenge the Vigilance proceedings in the Supreme Court.
Also Read:
The ‘Red Book’: How a scribble acquired a life of its own in Keralam
(Inputs from Dileep V Kumar. Edited by R Rajesh Kumar.)
