The Kerala High Court has extended a major relief to former ADGP M.R. Ajith Kumar, striking down critical observations made by a Vigilance Special Court against Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan. The court ordered that the remarks be expunged from the trial court’s order.
Key Developments
- The Vigilance court had rejected a clean chit previously granted to Ajith Kumar by the anti-corruption bureau, citing serious procedural flaws in the investigation.
- In its order, the Vigilance court raised questions about political interference, particularly highlighting that the Vigilance Department is under the CM’s control.
- The High Court has now sided with Ajith Kumar, holding that such remarks against the Chief Minister were unwarranted and must be removed.
Background of the Case
- A private complaint had been lodged alleging that Ajith Kumar amassed disproportionate assets.
- The Vigilance Department conducted a probe and submitted a detailed report clearing Ajith Kumar of all charges, citing lack of any compelling evidence.
- However, the special court criticized the inquiry for being superficial, noting that key elements like the source of funds and family finances were not sufficiently verified.
- The court also questioned why a junior investigating officer was tasked with probing a senior police official, suggesting that this undermined the integrity of the inquiry.
- Crucially, the court challenged the justification of the CM’s involvement, asking: “What exactly was the Chief Minister’s role in approving the inquiry report?”
High Court’s Rationale
- The High Court concluded that the special court’s derogatory observations about the Chief Minister lacked a proper legal basis.
- It emphasized that while the Vigilance Department is under executive control, administrative authority does not equate to interference in independent investigations.
- Further, the High Court said that such remarks could unfairly tarnish the image of a constitutional office like that of the CM.
Political Fallout
- Opposition parties, particularly the UDF, have seized on the controversy, accusing the government of shielding Ajith Kumar.
- They argue that the entire affair raises serious questions about accountability and the impartiality of high-level probes.
Why This Matters
- The High Court’s decision underscores the importance of judicial restraint when making remarks about political leadership, especially in sensitive corruption cases.
- It also highlights the fine balance between governance control and investigative independence in anti-corruption mechanisms.
- For Ajith Kumar, the ruling is a significant legal victory, strengthening his defense against ongoing asset-related allegations.
