“No Pressure from Political or Bureaucratic Quarters Will Be Tolerated; Kerala High Court Warns Against Bias, Orders Swift and Unbiased Probe in Karuvannoor Bank Scam
Sanchayita Lahkar
The High Court of Kerala Single Bench of Justice Dinesh Kumar Singh directed the Investigating Officer of the Karuvannoor Service Co-operative Bank scam to complete the pending investigation in nineteen associated crimes within three months and to thoroughly probe the involvement of all individuals named by the Enforcement Directorate. The Court mandated the officer to maintain impartiality and warned against any influence from political or bureaucratic sources. The officer was further directed to appear in court on the next scheduled date. The Court held that if it finds any deviation from proper investigation standards, the officer concerned will be held accountable for dereliction of duty.
The writ petition arose in the context of multiple criminal cases relating to the Karuvannoor Service Co-operative Bank fraud in Thrissur District, Kerala. The petitioner sought a judicial direction to ensure transparency and accountability in the ongoing investigation, particularly regarding the roles of political actors and other influential individuals named in the proceedings.
According to the record, Crime No. 302/CB/TSR/D/21 was one of several registered crimes stemming from a large-scale financial fraud allegedly perpetrated within the Karuvannoor Service Co-operative Bank. The petitioner requested judicial oversight of the investigation, citing delays and possible external interference.
The petition named the State of Kerala through its Home Department, the Director General of Police, the City Police Commissioner, the Irinjalakuda Rural Superintendent of Police, the Karuvannoor Service Co-operative Bank, the Enforcement Directorate, the Central Bureau of Investigation, and the Union of India as respondents.
In response to earlier court orders, Mr. E. Balakrishnan, Deputy Superintendent of Police and the designated Investigating Officer, appeared before the Court and informed that the final report in Crime No. 302/CB/TSR/D/21 had been submitted to the jurisdictional court on the same day. He further stated that investigations in nineteen related crimes were ongoing and would be completed within a period of three months.
The petitioner, represented by Advocate G. Sreekumar Chelur, submitted that the investigation was selectively ignoring key individuals whose roles had been pointed out in the ECIR filed by the Enforcement Directorate. The petitioner urged the Court to direct a broader probe that would encompass all named individuals, regardless of their political affiliations or positions.
The Director General of Prosecution, along with Additional Public Prosecutor P. Narayanan, appeared for the State authorities (Respondents 1 to 4). Advocates N. Raghuraj and Sayujya appeared for the Co-operative Bank (Respondent 5). Deputy Solicitor General of India, along with Advocate Jayasankar V. Nair, appeared for the Enforcement Directorate (Respondent 6), and for the Central Bureau of Investigation and the Union of India (Respondents 7 and 8).
The Enforcement Directorate had previously submitted an ECIR in which multiple individuals were named for their alleged complicity in the financial fraud. The ED’s counsel informed the Court that the affidavit and ECIR document could be handed over to the state investigation team for further action.
The petition was earlier posted for progress monitoring, and the Court had directed the Investigating Officer to remain present for updates.
Justice Singh recorded the following in open court regarding the status of the investigation and the responsibilities of the officer:
“Mr. E. Balakrishnan, Deputy Superintendent of Police, the Investigating Officer of Crime No. 650 of 2021 and other connected crimes has appeared in the Court, submitted that the final report in Crime No. 302/CB/TSR/D/21 has been submitted in the court concerned today.”
Acknowledging the submission on pending investigations, the Court stated:
“He further submits that the investigation is taking place at high speed and in respect of the other nineteen crimes registered in respect of the financial fraud committed in the Karuvannoor Service Co-operative Bank scam shall be submitted within a period of three months.”
Addressing the concerns about possible interference or suppression of politically sensitive aspects, the Court directed: “The Investigating Officer is directed to investigate the role of all accused, who had been named by the Enforcement Directorate in the ECIR filed by them.”
The Court ordered proactive information sharing and coordination: “The investigating officer may collect the affidavit and copy of the ECIR from Mr. Jayashankar, the learned counsel representing the Enforcement Directorate.”
The Court issued a cautionary directive on impartiality: “The investigating officer is warned against coming under pressure from any political or bureaucratic quarters. He is expected to carry out the investigation in a fair manner without being influenced or coming under any pressure from anywhere.”
Stating the consequences of investigative lapses, the Court recorded: “If this court finds that the investigation has not been carried out properly and the roles of the political activists have not been investigated fairly, the investigating officer will bear the brunt for his dereliction of duty.”
Expressing expectations regarding integrity, the Court noted: “This court, therefore, hopes and trusts that the investigating officer will carry out the investigation in a proper and fair manner as expected from him being the officer of the police force.”
Concluding the proceedings, the High Court issued the following order:
“The Investigating Officer is directed to investigate the role of all accused, who had been named by the Enforcement Directorate in the ECIR filed by them.”
The Court added a facilitation directive: “The investigating officer may collect the affidavit and copy of the ECIR from Mr. Jayashankar, the learned counsel representing the Enforcement Directorate.”
Issuing a caution to maintain investigative autonomy, the Court warned: “The investigating officer is warned against coming under pressure from any political or bureaucratic quarters.”
The Court held accountability: “If this court finds that the investigation has not been carried out properly and the roles of the political activists have not been investigated fairly, the investigating officer will bear the brunt for his dereliction of duty.”
The matter was posted for further hearing, with mandatory presence of the officer: “Post on 02.07.2025. On the next date of posting of this writ petition, the investigating officer shall remain present before this court.”
Advocates Representing the Parties
For the Petitioner: Sri G. Sreekumar Chelur, Advocate
For Respondents: Director General of Prosecution with Shri P. Narayanan, Additional Public Prosecutor, M/s. N. Raghuraj and Sayujya, Advocates, Deputy Solicitor General of India with Sri Jayasankar V. Nair, Deputy Solicitor General of India.
Case Title: Suresh M. V. v. State of Kerala and Others
Case Number: WP(C) No. 15762 of 2021
Coram: Justice Dinesh Kumar Singh
[Read/Download order]
