The Supreme Court in Pinarayi Vijayan v. K.M. Shajahan & Ors. observed that the appellants had locus standi to challenge the Kerala High Court’s order directing FIR registration without a preliminary inquiry. The case arose from alleged financial irregularities involving M/s CMRL and M/s Exalogic, following investigations by the Serious Fraud Investigation Office (SFIO) and the Enforcement Directorate (ED).
The Court highlighted the procedural distinction between Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC), and Section 175(4) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), particularly regarding safeguards available to public servants before a Magistrate orders an investigation. Emphasising the evolving framework for FIR registration under the BNSS, the Court held that the appellants’ request for leave to appeal had been wrongly rejected.
Accordingly, the Supreme Court set aside the impugned order and permitted the appellants to pursue their appeals before the Division Bench, while allowing them to seek interim relief. The investigation was stayed for ten days to enable them to do so.
The ruling highlights the procedural changes introduced by the BNSS and the importance of balancing the mandatory registration of FIRs with procedural safeguards, the right to be heard, and the requirements of special legislation, including the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002.