SC to hear Vijayan's CMRL bribery plea, YSRCP's civic poll petition on Wednesday

A special bench of the Supreme Court is scheduled to hear two politically significant petitions on Wednesday, one filed by former Keralam Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan in connection with the alleged Cochin Minerals and Rutile Limited (CMRL) bribery case and another by the YSR Congress Party (YSRCP) alleging violence during nominations for urban local body elections in Andhra Pradesh.

A bench of Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana will take up the matters during the Supreme Court's Dussehra vacation.

The YSRCP has challenged an October 18 order of the Andhra Pradesh High Court refusing to extend the nomination period by a day, while Vijayan and his family members have questioned the Kerala High Court's refusal to entertain their appeals against a direction to register an FIR in the alleged bribery case.

𝗬𝗦𝗥𝗖𝗣 𝗮𝗹𝗹𝗲𝗴𝗲𝘀 𝘃𝗶𝗼𝗹𝗲𝗻𝗰𝗲 𝗱𝘂𝗿𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗻𝗼𝗺𝗶𝗻𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀

The YSRCP, led by former Andhra Pradesh Chief Minister Y S Jagan Mohan Reddy, has alleged that widespread violence prevented several of its candidates from filing nominations for the urban local body elections.

In its petition, the party has sought police protection for candidates, an extension of the nomination deadline and the establishment of additional or alternative nomination centres to ensure safe submission of papers.

The plea, filed by party general secretary Lella Appireddy through advocate Mahfooz Ahsan Nazki, alleged that several candidates were assaulted and physically prevented from reaching nomination centres.

The nomination process began on October 16 and concluded on October 18.

The party approached the Supreme Court after the Andhra Pradesh High Court dismissed its request for a one-day extension, observing that the deadline had already expired and that granting additional time would interfere with the election process.

The YSRCP has maintained that the alleged violence compromised the fairness of the nomination process and prevented its candidates from exercising their electoral rights.

𝗩𝗶𝗷𝗮𝘆𝗮𝗻 𝗰𝗵𝗮𝗹𝗹𝗲𝗻𝗴𝗲𝘀 𝗞𝗲𝗿𝗮𝗹𝗮 𝗛𝗖 𝗼𝗿𝗱𝗲𝗿

The special bench will also consider petitions filed by Vijayan, his daughter Veena T and son-in-law P A Mohamed Riyas against the Kerala High Court's October 15 order dismissing their applications seeking permission to appeal an earlier direction to register an FIR.

On October 9, a single judge of the Kerala High Court directed the Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau (VACB) to register a case in connection with alleged irregular payments made by CMRL.

Vijayan and his family members subsequently sought to challenge the direction, arguing that they had not been given an opportunity to be heard before the order was passed.

They also contended that the original petition was effectively a public interest litigation and should therefore have been considered by a division bench dealing with PIL matters.

However, the Kerala High Court rejected their applications on October 15, holding that a person accused in a corruption case had no legal right to be heard before the registration of an FIR.

𝗧𝘄𝗼 𝗙𝗜𝗥𝘀 𝗿𝗲𝗴𝗶𝘀𝘁𝗲𝗿𝗲𝗱 𝗶𝗻 𝗖𝗠𝗥𝗟 𝗰𝗮𝘀𝗲

Following the October 9 direction, the VACB's Special Investigation Unit-1 registered two FIRs against Vijayan and his family members in connection with the alleged bribery case.

The high court had directed the anti-corruption agency to act on a report submitted by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) to the state police.

The ED had sought registration of a case based on material gathered during its investigation and searches conducted under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act.

The central agency has alleged that CMRL made fraudulent payments amounting to Rs 2.78 crore to Veena's now-defunct company, Exalogic Solutions, purportedly in exchange for IT consultancy services.

The payments and their stated purpose form part of the allegations under investigation and have not been established as criminal wrongdoing by a court.

𝗦𝗽𝗲𝗰𝗶𝗮𝗹 𝗯𝗲𝗻𝗰𝗵 𝘁𝗼 𝗲𝘅𝗮𝗺𝗶𝗻𝗲 𝗽𝗹𝗲𝗮𝘀

According to the Supreme Court's schedule, both matters will be heard by the vacation bench on Wednesday.

While the Andhra Pradesh petition concerns alleged obstruction of the electoral nomination process, the Kerala case raises questions about the legal rights of individuals seeking to challenge an order directing registration of a corruption case.

The court's proceedings will determine the immediate course of the two petitions, including whether any interim relief is warranted.