Pinarayi Vijayan moves Kerala High Court against FIR order in ₹2.78-crore pay-off case
Leader of the Opposition in Kerala Pinarayi Vijayan on Thursday (October 22, 2026) filed an appeal in the Kerala High Court, challenging a Single Judge order that had earlier this month directed the registration of a First Information Report (FIR) against him, his daughter T. Veena and his son-in-law P.A. Mohamed Riyas in the CMRL-Exalogic pay-off case.
The High Court is expected to consider the plea on Saturday (October 24, 2026).
The appeal comes a day after the Supreme Court stayed, for seven days, a Kerala Police investigation into the FIR registered against the three in connection with the alleged ₹2.78-crore pay-off.
How the case reached the High Court
A Single Bench of the Kerala High Court had directed the Kerala Police to register the FIR under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, against Mr. Vijayan, Ms. Veena and Mr. Riyas. The direction followed information furnished by the Directorate of Enforcement (ED) to the Kerala Police under Section 66(2) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), 2002, regarding the alleged pay-off. Section 66(2) of the PMLA allows the ED to share information with other investigating agencies.
After the Single Judge passed the order on October 9, 2026, the three approached a Division Bench of the High Court seeking permission to appeal against it. The Division Bench declined leave to appeal, but held that its order did not take away their right to pursue constitutional or statutory remedies against the registration of the FIR. It was against this refusal that they moved the Supreme Court, which granted a seven-day stay on the police investigation.
Appearing before the Division Bench, lawyers representing Mr. Vijayan, Ms. Veena and Mr. Riyas had argued that they were not given an opportunity to be heard, even though the Single Judge's order directly affected them.
Where the matter stands
The dispute is presently at the stage of investigation. No charge sheet has been filed before a court, and the allegations against the three have not been tested in any trial. Under Indian law, an accused is presumed innocent until a competent court holds otherwise. The registration of an FIR is the beginning of a police inquiry, not a finding of guilt.
The sequence of proceedings also illustrates how the case has moved between forums. A Single Judge of the High Court issued a direction to the police; a Division Bench declined to entertain an appeal against that direction while preserving the parties' other legal options; the Supreme Court then intervened on the limited question of investigation, ordering a short stay; and now the Leader of the Opposition has returned to the High Court to challenge the original direction itself.
The Kerala High Court's decision on whether to admit and hear the appeal will determine the next stage of the proceedings. If the appeal is entertained, the court may also consider whether the parties should have been heard before the Single Judge issued the direction to register an FIR.
The case involves serious allegations that have drawn considerable public attention in Kerala. Because it involves the Leader of the Opposition and members of his family, the proceedings are likely to be watched closely for both their legal effect and their political implications. This report will be updated as the High Court takes up the plea.
