Thiruvananthapuram/Kochi: Home minister Ramesh Chennithala said on Saturday that govt would decide on registering a case in the CMRL-Exalogic financial transaction case after examining the legal advice received from the advocate general (AG) on the recommendation of enforcement directorate (ED).Chennithala said that further action would be decided in consultation with chief minister V D Satheesan. “We will examine what can legally be done and take appropriate action,” Chennithala said.AG K Jaju Babu provided his legal opinion on Friday, stating that an FIR could be registered if the facts and materials furnished by the ED disclosed a cognisable offence. If not, the police can conduct a preliminary inquiry under the Prevention of Corruption (PC) Act before registering an FIR. The AG arrived at the conclusion after two days of discussions with director general of prosecution T Asaf Ali and other law officers.ED had recommended that the police register a case against the trio — former chief minister and current leader of opposition Pinarayi Vijayan, his daughter Veena T and her husband and former PWD minister Mohamed Riyas — under the PC Act, alleging that Cochin Minerals and Rutile Ltd (CMRL) made payments of Rs 3.28 crore to Exalogic Solutions, a defunct company owned by Veena, without receiving corresponding IT consultancy services. The agency alleged that the payments were linked to an alleged corruption transaction.Though govt sought the AG’s opinion on the course of action to be taken on ED’s communication to the state police chief Ravada Chandrasekhar, it faced criticism over the delay in taking a decision. The ED had sent the letter under a Prevention of Money Laundering Act section, which requires the central agency to share information or material with the authority concerned if it forms an opinion that another law has been contravened. While the ED has a statutory duty to transmit relevant findings, the state agency receiving the information retains the responsibility to independently evaluate the material and take appropriate action.Supreme Court, in Vijay Madanlal Choudhary vs Union of India, held that if the ED comes across information regarding a scheduled offence during its investigation, it must share it with the competent authority for necessary action. The state agency is required to deal with such information in accordance with law. Based on the allegations raised by the ED in the CMRL-Exalogic case, provisions under PC Act sections dealing with an offence relating to a public servant being bribed, taking undue advantage to influence a public servant and criminal misconduct by a public servant could be attracted.
