Today, On 7th May, The Kerala High Court, in the midst of the political clash between AAP and BJP over the Kodakara money heist probe involving BJP State President K Surendran, addressed a PIL filed by AAP’s State President Vinod Mathew Wilson. The court emphasized the importance of a fair investigation, ensuring that political affiliations do not interfere with justice.
Kerala: The Kerala High Court, on Tuesday, firmly stated its refusal to allow the court to be utilized as a battleground for political conflicts. Justices P Gopinath and Syam Kumar VM, constituting a division bench, expressed this stance while examining a public interest litigation (PIL) filed by Vinod Mathew Wilson, the State President of the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP). The PIL raised concerns regarding the investigation of the 2021 Kodakara black money heist, which allegedly involves K Surendran, the State President of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP).
During today’s session, Justice Gopinath verbally stated,
“Our concern is solely this, The Court must not be utilized as a battleground for political confrontations. We will not tolerate it. While you may have diverse justifications, we cannot permit such actions.”
This emphasizes the court’s stance against politicizing legal proceedings and highlights its commitment to maintaining impartiality and adherence to legal procedures.
Justice Gopinath further commented on the proactive role of investigating agencies in the case, stating,
“The state police has submitted the chargesheet, the Income Tax Department is probing the fund sources, and the Enforcement Directorate is working under the PMLA (Prevention of Money Laundering Act). What additional actions are necessary?”
This inquiry highlights the comprehensive approach taken by law enforcement agencies in addressing various aspects of the case, demonstrating a thorough investigative process under legal mandates.
In April 2021, just days before the Kerala Legislative Assembly Election, a car traveling on the National Highway near Kodakara in Thrissur subjected to a robbery. The car’s driver lodged a complaint stating that Rs. 25 lakh, intended for payment to Dharmajan, had been stolen. However, later discovered that the actual amount involved exceeded Rs. 3 crores.
According to Vinod Mathew Wilson, it revealed during the investigation of the heist that unaccounted money had been brought from Karnataka to Kerala for the purpose of funding the BJP’s election campaign , as directed by BJP officials, including K Surendran. In his PIL, Wilson argued that the Enforcement Directorate (ED) had been unduly delaying its investigation into the money laundering activities uncovered by the State Police. This delay strongly suggested that, without the intervention of the court, the ED would not take appropriate action against those involved in the hawala transactions.
The term “hawala system” refers to an informal and illegal means of transferring funds from one location to another.
Wilson further contended that the alleged offenses in the case should be punishable under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) and demanded that the National Investigation Agency (NIA) handle the investigation accordingly.
The Public Interest Litigation (PIL) mentioned,
“The hawala transactions are causing detrimental effects on India’s economic security. The investigation under the UAPA Act is necessary in this regard. Any action impacting India’s economic security falls under the purview of a terrorist act as per Section 15 of the UAPA Act, thus mandating a comprehensive investigation.”
Wilson informed the Court that he had sent representations to the Enforcement Directorate (ED) requesting further action against individuals involved in hawala transactions. He also sent another representation to the Central government and the National Investigation Agency (NIA), seeking action under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) and the NIA Act.
However, Wilson claimed that no action has been taken by the authorities in response to his representations. Consequently, he approached the High Court through a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) to seek directions for the concerned authorities to consider and take action on his representations.
Read Also: Mamata Banerjee Challenges Former Judge Abhijit Gangopadhyay Following His BJP Induction
During the court hearing today, the counsel representing the ED informed the Court that the ED’s investigation is almost complete and questioned the viability of the PIL. The counsel also argued that Wilson’s petition, filed three years after the incident, seems to be politically motivated, particularly given the ongoing 2024 Lok Sabha Elections.
The ED’s counsel offered to submit a statement regarding the matter, and the Court granted him time to do so. The Court scheduled the next hearing for May 10. Furthermore, the Court clarified that it has not yet admitted the matter.
Wilson represented by advocates Manu Ramachandran, K Kiranlal, TS Sarath, R Rajesh, Sameer M Nair, Sailakshmi Menon, Jothisha KS, and Shifana M.
The Central Government Counsel, Jaishankar V Nair, appeared on behalf of the ED.
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE
