Vigilance Bureau Exonerates Congress Leader in High-Profile Assets Case
The Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau (VACB) has officially cleared Congress leader V S Sivakumar of all charges in a long-running disproportionate assets case. In its conclusive final report submitted to the Kerala state government, the bureau determined that Sivakumar did not amass any wealth beyond his legitimate and known sources of income during his tenure as a minister.
Detailed Investigation Finds No Evidence of Illegal Wealth
The comprehensive vigilance probe meticulously examined Sivakumar's financial holdings and concluded that all assets held by the former minister were fully commensurate with his declared income. The investigation report explicitly stated that the assets included only his personal earnings and properties legally owned by his wife. No evidence was found to substantiate allegations that Sivakumar acquired illegal wealth either directly or through any benami arrangements while serving as a minister in the Oommen Chandy-led United Democratic Front (UDF) government.
The report emphasized that the former minister's assets perfectly matched his lawful earnings during the relevant period under scrutiny. This finding represents a significant legal vindication for Sivakumar, who has maintained his innocence throughout the prolonged investigation.
Case Background and Initial Allegations
The disproportionate assets case originally alleged that Sivakumar had accumulated wealth far exceeding his known sources of income during his ministerial tenure in the UDF government. Specific claims included assertions of a substantial increase in his assets during his term as health minister and allegations that he had acquired ownership of a private hospital in Thiruvananthapuram through benami arrangements.
The case was formally registered by the special cell of the VACB in February 2020 against Sivakumar and three other individuals. The allegations centered on the purported amassment of wealth disproportionate to known income sources while Sivakumar served as a minister in the previous UDF cabinet.
Legal Framework and Initial Proceedings
The vigilance bureau had originally booked Sivakumar along with M Rajendran, Shyju Haran, and N Harikumar under Sections 13(2) read with 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act and Section 120 of the Indian Penal Code. Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act stipulates that a public servant found guilty of criminal misconduct faces imprisonment ranging from one to seven years, along with substantial fines. Section 13(1)(d) specifically defines criminal misconduct as obtaining pecuniary advantage through corrupt means or by abusing official position.
The VACB had initially launched a preliminary inquiry against Sivakumar in 2016, subsequently submitting a report to the government suggesting he had allegedly acquired assets beyond his known income sources and recommending a detailed investigation.
Adverse Findings Against Associates
While exonerating Sivakumar, the vigilance report did flag significant adverse findings against three individuals closely associated with the Congress leader: N S Harikumar, M Rajendran, and his driver Shyju Haran. According to the bureau's investigation, these three individuals allegedly amassed substantial assets during the period when Sivakumar served as a minister.
Based on these findings, the VACB has formally recommended that the Income Tax Department initiate a separate probe against these three associates to investigate the source and legitimacy of their accumulated wealth. This recommendation ensures that the investigation into potential financial irregularities continues, albeit focused on individuals other than the former minister himself.
The bureau's final report represents the culmination of years of investigation and provides a definitive legal conclusion to a case that has attracted significant political attention in Kerala. The complete exoneration of Sivakumar while recommending further action against his associates creates a nuanced outcome that addresses different aspects of the original allegations.
