Will V.D. Satheesan and Ramesh Chennithala Become Among India’s Finest Administrators?
Will Kerala’s Strong Chief Minister V.D. Satheesan and Home Minister Ramesh Chennithala consign Vellappally Natesan and Pinarayi Vijayan to the dock in the Microfinance and Monthly Payment cases?
Will Satheesan and Chennithala find a place in the pages of history?
As the noose tightens around Pinarayi in the Monthly Payment case, Vellappally’s legal battle in the Microfinance case enters a crucial phase
Two separate legal controversies in Kerala politics are simultaneously entering a crucial phase.
On one side, a Crime Branch investigation is being initiated into the Monthly Payment–CMRL–Exalogic controversy surrounding former Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan.
On the other, the government’s position regarding prosecution proceedings in the Microfinance case, in which SNDP Yogam General Secretary Vellappally Natesan and others are accused, is under the scrutiny of the High Court.
Two cases.
Two centres of influence.
And ahead lies a test of the rule of law.
In the Monthly Payment case, the government decided to initiate a Crime Branch investigation against Pinarayi Vijayan, Veena Vijayan and Mohammed Riyas based on a report submitted by the Enforcement Directorate. There are also moves to constitute a special investigation team under the leadership of an ADGP.
However, the initiation of an investigation cannot by itself be construed as registration of an FIR or as a step towards arrest.
Whether the available records disclose indications of any criminal conduct has to be examined through the investigation. Reports also indicate that the government has considered the legal possibility of conducting a preliminary inquiry before registering an FIR.
This is where the distinction between political allegations and legal proceedings must be clearly maintained.
An allegation is not a finding of guilt.
An investigation is not proof of guilt.
The position in the Microfinance case is different.
Legal proceedings are continuing in the case registered in 2016 against Vellappally Natesan and others. The High Court has sought an explanation from the government over the delay concerning prosecution sanction. The court had also directed the Additional Chief Secretary to appear in person and explain the government’s position.
Here too, an important legal distinction needs to be maintained.
A dispute over prosecution sanction does not mean that the court has found the accused guilty.
The court is examining the government’s procedure and the delay involved in the matter.
Yet, the political question arising from these two developments cannot simply be ignored.
In one case, the government itself is moving ahead with an investigation.
In the other, the government’s procedure is under close judicial scrutiny.
Therefore, whether the same legal standards are being applied in both cases will become an important test of the government’s credibility.
Political friendship or political rivalry should not determine the course of legal action.
Irrespective of who the individual is, the nature of the allegations and the available evidence must form the basis of legal proceedings.
The investigation against Pinarayi Vijayan will naturally invite a strong political response from the CPI(M).
At the same time, if further action in the Microfinance case gathers momentum, it could have repercussions for the political equations surrounding the SNDP Yogam.
Reducing these developments merely to the political curiosity of “Who will be put behind bars?” would diminish the legal seriousness of the issues involved.
Vellappally Natesan, who has turned 90, and Pinarayi Vijayan, who is approaching 90—two prominent figures from two different political and social centres.
An old Microfinance case surrounding one is once again coming under discussion.
A new Crime Branch investigation surrounding the other is beginning to take shape.
The verdict should not be delivered on the political stage.
It belongs to the legal arena.
Where will the investigation lead?
Will an FIR become necessary?
How will the further proceedings in the Microfinance case move forward?
These are questions that must ultimately be answered by the investigating agencies and the courts.
But one thing is clear.
The two cases are heating up Kerala’s political landscape at the same time.
Here, the approach of Chief Minister V.D. Satheesan and Home Minister Ramesh Chennithala will also be crucial.
This is an opportunity to demonstrate that the law applies equally to everyone.
Without protecting anyone.
Without targeting anyone.
Based solely on evidence.
That is the real test of any government.
Let the records come out.
Let the investigation proceed.
Let the court decide.
Let the law speak beyond the noise of politics.
Only then will Kerala know how tightly the legal noose has actually tightened around anyone.
