Today, On 11th April, The Kerala High Court ordered a CBI investigation against the Chief Principal Secretary to the Kerala Chief Minister over allegations of possessing disproportionate assets. The court directed the probe after reviewing a petition citing unexplained wealth.
Kochi: The High Court in Kerala ordered the CBI on Friday to register an FIR and investigate the former Chief Principal Secretary to Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan, K M Abraham, following a complaint alleging that the retired bureaucrat accumulated wealth disproportionate to his known income sources.
Justice K Babu directed the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to probe Abraham, a retired IAS officer who previously served as Additional Chief Secretary (Finance), based on a plea from Kottayam-based activist Jomon Puthenpurackal.
Upon reviewing the preliminary enquiry report and other evidence presented, the High Court concluded,
“Prima facie, it is established that respondent No.3 (Abraham) had movable and immovable properties disproportionate to his known sources of income.”
The court further noted that the “ongoing investigation by the Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau (VACB) would not instil confidence in the public,” citing doubts about the credibility of its inquiry.
The court remarked that the VACB,
“Deliberately excluded the acquisition of property having substantial value by respondent No.3 (Abraham) with the intent to protect him.”
It added,
“Strangely enough, the enquiry report was scrutinised and verified by the Director of the VACB. There was a deliberate attempt to save respondent No.3 on the part of the State Vigilance.”
To ensure a fair and thorough investigation that retains public confidence in state agencies, the High Court determined that the CBI should conduct the inquiry. It also set aside a 2017 order from the Enquiry Commissioner-cum-Special Judge in Thiruvananthapuram, who had dismissed the petitioner’s complaint against Abraham, labeling that order as “perverse and wholly unreasonable.”
The court criticized the Special Judge for “in a casual and perfunctory manner, blindly accept[ing] the quick verification report” from the VACB and concluding that no cognizable offence under the Prevention of Corruption Act had been identified.
The High Court stated that the Special Judge should have considered the petitioner’s claims related to several properties worth crores that were disregarded in the VACB’s inquiry.
The court added,
“The approach adopted by the Special Judge is not acceptable,”
It highlighted that the “non-consideration of relevant materials and palpable misreading of records were evident in the challenged order.”
It stated,
“The finding of the Special Judge is untenable in law, grossly erroneous and based on no material. Therefore, the impugned order is liable to be set aside,”
The High Court also criticized the VACB’s legal advisor for verifying the quick verification report and concluding that Abraham had not amassed wealth disproportionate to his known sources of income during the review period.
The court asserted that the legal advisor’s role is not to “blindly support” the police or the vigilance submissions, explaining,
“The statutory responsibility of a legal advisor is to uphold the law. He is independent of the Executive. He is not subject to the orders of the higher officials of the executive. He is not the servant of anyone. His statutory responsibility is to bring the truth before the court.”
Justice Babu remarked,
“In the present case, I must say that the legal advisor has miserably failed in his responsibility.”
The petitioner alleged that while in service, Abraham acquired an apartment worth Rs three crore in Mumbai, another worth Rs one crore in Thycaud, Thiruvananthapuram, and constructed a three-storey shopping complex in Kadappakkada, Kollam district, valued at Rs eight crore.
Abraham has denied these allegations.
Case Title: Jomon Puthenpurackal v State of Kerala