CMRL Bribery Case: Kerala High Court Appoints Amicus Curiae To Address Arguments Following Death Of Revision Petitioner

The Kerala High Court on Wednesday appointed an Amicus Curiae in the revision petition filed by social activist, Gireesh Babu(since deceased), against the dismissal of a complaint seeking investigation into the alleged bribery carried out by high ranking public officials of the State in connection with the mining and other business interests of the Cochin Minerals and Rutile Ltd (CMRL) by the Court of the Enquiry Commissioner and Special Judge (Vigilance), Muvattupuzha.

Justice K. Babu appointed Advocate Akhil Vijay as the Amicus Curiae in the matter today. 

"As the petitioner is no more, Akhil Vijay is appointed as the Amicus Curiae to address the arguments, for and on behalf of the petitioner," the Court said. 

The deceased petitioner had accused Veena Thaikandiyil (Veena Vijayan), daughter of Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan (2nd accused), and her company Exalogic Solutions Pvt. ltd. (1st and 7th accused respectively), of having received illegal consideration under the guise of her father.

Apart from the above, other public servants such as the leader of the Opposition and Congress MLA Ramesh Chennithala, MLA Kunhalikutty, former Minister for Public Works V.K. Ibrahim Kunju, and A. Govindan have also been named as other accused in the matter for having received illegal gratification; while CMRL, its Managing Director Sathivilas Narayan Kartha Sasidharan Kartha (9th accused), the Chief Financial Officer K.S. Suresh Kumar (10th accused), and the Chief General Manager of Finance and Company Secretary P. Suresh Kumar are alleged to have given out bribes for illegal gratification.

The petitioner had claimed that Income Tax Authorities had unearthed evidence revealing illicit relationship between the company officials and several politicians, particularly those arrayed as the accused. It was alleged that Veena received Rs. 5 lakh whereas her company received kickbacks worth Rs. 3 lakhs, on a monthly basis. The transactions were stated to have been apparently based on a fake agreement for software services.

The Vigilance Court had dismissed the petitioner's complaint on finding that there was no prima facie case, but that only general allegations were made. It was against the Vigilance court's decision that the present revision petition was filed. 

The matter has been posted for further consideration tomorrow. 

Case Title: Gireesh Babu v. State of Kerala & Anr.

Case Number: Crl. Rev. Pet. 890/ 2023