Disproportionate Assets Case: High Court Grants Relief to MR Ajith Kumar, Quashes Vigilance Court Order

Court building representing the High Court’s decision to quash the Vigilance Court order and halt further investigation against ADGP MR Ajith Kumar.

Kochi: In a major relief for ADGP MR Ajith Kumar, the High Court has ruled that there will be no further investigation in the disproportionate assets case against him. The Court quashed the Vigilance Court’s earlier order that had cancelled the clean chit given to the officer.

The High Court also clarified that complainants must obtain prior permission before approaching the court and added that they are free to file a fresh complaint later, if required. In a separate petition filed by the state government challenging the Vigilance Court’s remarks against the Chief Minister’s Office, the High Court removed those remarks after hearing detailed arguments.

MR Ajith Kumar had appealed against the Vigilance Court’s decision to reject the clean chit, arguing that the order was issued without properly evaluating the Vigilance report. He stated that the case reached the Vigilance Court solely through allegations publicly made by an MLA in the media, without any credible supporting evidence. The plea also sought a stay on the Vigilance Court verdict, stating that the facts were not correctly assessed.


What the Vigilance Court Had Ruled Earlier

The Vigilance Court had earlier held that the Chief Minister cannot intervene in the investigation into MR Ajith Kumar’s alleged disproportionate assets. The court had rejected the Vigilance report exonerating the senior officer and criticized both the investigation and the statement in the final report suggesting that it was approved by the Chief Minister.

The court had observed that while the Chief Minister is the administrative head of the Vigilance department, neither political nor administrative authorities have the right to interfere in any stage of the investigation. It emphasized that only the legal system can decide guilt or innocence, and any external influence compromises the fairness of an inquiry.

With the High Court now setting aside the Vigilance Court’s order, the case takes a significant turn, offering relief to MR Ajith Kumar while leaving room for future complaints if due procedures are followed.