Union Minister V Muraleedharan has demanded clarification from Kerala Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan regarding the delayed cancellation of the contract for black sand mining by CMRL (Cochin Minerals and Rutile Limited). Muraleedharan questioned why the Chief Minister waited four years to revoke the contract, especially since the Union Government introduced a rule in 2019 restricting black sand mining to the public sector. He suggested a possible link between the delayed action and undisclosed financial interests, insinuating involvement in corrupt practices.
Muraleedharan criticized those who criticize the Union Government’s support for the private sector, alleging their complicity in illicit activities. Reports indicate that the State Government only terminated black sand mining in December 2023.
In recent developments, Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan faces further challenges as the Kerala High Court declined to halt the Serious Fraud Investigation Office (SFIO) probe into the operations of Kerala State Industrial Development Corporation (KSIDC), Kerala Minerals and Rutile Limited (KMRL), and Exalogic Solutions. This decision was made despite a petition filed by KSIDC seeking to dismiss the SFIO’s investigation. Veena Vijayan, daughter of CM Vijayan and spouse of Kerala CPM minister P.A. Mohammed Riyas, owns Exalogic Solutions. The Kerala HC questioned why a public limited company like KSIDC was concerned about the investigation, prompting speculation about potential motives behind the petition.
The recent decision by the Kerala High Court to deny the halt of the Serious Fraud Investigation Office (SFIO) probe closely follows a similar ruling by the Karnataka High Court. In Karnataka, the court rejected Exalogic’s plea to stop the SFIO inquiry into its financial transactions with CMRL. These rulings pose significant setbacks for Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan and his daughter. Additionally, the Karnataka High Court instructed Exalogic to provide all requested documents to the SFIO for investigation.
KSIDC approached the Kerala High Court, expressing concerns that the investigation could damage its reputation. In response, the court questioned whether a thorough and genuine investigation was not in the best interest of KSIDC. It emphasised the importance of demonstrating innocence to be removed from the list of accused parties.
The Kerala High Court views KSIDC’s petition as having vested interests. KSIDC, a public sector undertaking (PSU) in Kerala, holds shares in CMRL, the company accused of making monthly payments to Veena’s Exalogic Solutions in Bangalore. KSIDC reportedly has a director nominee in CMRL, leading to the extension of the investigation to KSIDC in relation to Veena and her company.
The Income Tax department has allegedly traced illegitimate payments received by Veena from CMRL both personally and under her company’s name. CMRL itself disclosed these payments, admitting to also making payments to certain political leaders who purportedly served as intermediaries. One such individual, identified as ‘PV,’ has stirred controversy, with opposition parties suggesting it stands for Pinarayi Vijayan. Additionally, there are allegations that some Congress leaders are also among the recipients.
The Serious Fraud Investigation Office (SFIO) conducted investigations into CMRL and KSIDC to gather evidence, prompting fear among the accused about the exposure of sensitive information. Their primary objective now is to halt the investigation process at any cost. However, the recent rulings from both High Courts have dealt a blow to this strategy. The hiring of high-profile lawyers by the accused, at considerable expense, underscores their apprehension.
Speculation has arisen that the Chief Minister may have altered the industrial policy and abused power for the benefit of CMRL, allegedly resulting in a quid pro quo arrangement for his daughter. There is growing suspicion that the Chief Minister is anxious about the revelation of such illicit dealings. Despite his assertions of innocence and refusal to tolerate his family being embroiled in controversies, doubts persist among the public regarding his involvement.
Despite ongoing allegations and investigations, the Chief Minister and the Communist Party of India (Marxist) (CPM) have not provided satisfactory answers. CPM contends that Veena, as a young entrepreneur, has the right to operate her business, yet she remains silent on the accusations against her. Significant financial resources have been allocated to legal representation, indicating a high level of concern among the accused.
Recent developments have exposed the CM and CPM’s propaganda, which sought to dismiss allegations against Veena’s company as politically motivated. Despite attempts to downplay the issue of “monthly payments,” public sentiment increasingly suggests that the Chief Minister may be involved in various forms of corruption, including payments to his daughter. The insistence by CPM that the media has fabricated the “monthly payment” issue contradicts public perception.
Many believe that both the Chief Minister and his daughter should cooperate fully with investigations. Merely asserting innocence is insufficient in the face of mounting evidence and public skepticism.
