Fresh documents, retraction affidavits put ED probe on CMRL-Exalogic case under scrutiny

KOCHI: With each passing day, fresh documents relating to the CMRL-Exalogic case are surfacing, bringing renewed focus on the Enforcement Directorate’s (ED) investigation and the evidence gathered in the alleged financial transactions involving Cochin Minerals and Rutile Ltd (CMRL), Exalogic Solutions Pvt Ltd, and people associated with former minister P A Mohamed Riyas.

The latest development came on Wednesday with the surfacing of retraction affidavits submitted by two CMRL officials, Chief Financial Officer K S Suresh Kumar and Chief General Manager P Suresh Kumar. Both alleged that statements recorded by the ED during their questioning in April 2024 did not accurately reflect their submissions.

The development came a day after details from the ED’s communication to State Police Chief Ravada Chandrasekhar surfaced, including references to WhatsApp chats, statements of persons close to Riyas, and other material cited by the agency in its findings.

This has put the case in the spotlight, with attention now turning to both the allegations under investigation and the nature of the evidence gathered by the agency.

The two CMRL officials were questioned at the ED’s Kochi zonal office between April 14 and 17, 2024. In their affidavits, P Suresh Kumar alleged that he was intimidated and pressured while his statement was being recorded and that explanations given on behalf of CMRL were omitted or altered.

K S Suresh Kumar alleged that investigators pressured him to name specific political leaders as alleged recipients of money from CMRL. Both officials alleged that their signatures were obtained on statements that did not fully reflect what they had told the agency.

The allegations in the affidavits have not been established and the ED has rejected coercion charges. ED sources said retraction of statements is a strategy sometimes adopted in probe involving statements recorded under Section 50 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA).

“ED’s case will not completely depend on the statements taken under Section 50 of the PMLA. There will be supporting evidence and such documents and evidence will be presented during the trial,” an ED source said.

The source said the original statements, subsequent retractions and supporting material would form part of evidence, with their evidentiary value to be assessed by the court.

The ED has forwarded its findings to the state police chief under Section 66(2) of the PMLA, seeking registration of a separate corruption case against former chief minister Pinarayi Vijayan, his daughter T Veena and her husband Riyas, and others. The state government is yet to take a decision on the recommendation.

ED sources maintained that its investigation is progressing and that the surfacing of individual documents or discussions around them would not affect the probe. Ultimately, the case will depend on the complete body of evidence placed before the competent court.

WHAT WENT ‘PUBLIC’

Tuesday: Details of ED’s communication to state police chief, including references to WhatsApp chats involving a 16-member group comprising people associated with P A Mohamed Riyas, and other material cited by the agency in its findings.

Wednesday: Retraction affidavits submitted by CMRL officials alleging that their statements recorded by the ED in April 2024 did not fully reflect their submissions.