THRISSUR: Senior BJP leader Prakash Javadekar on Saturday demanded a probe by competent central agencies into corruption charges over the alleged financial dealings between Kerala Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan's daughter Veena Vijayan's firm and a Kochi-based minerals company.
He alleged it is also a curious case of corruption where the owner of the company has given Rs 96 crore to leaders of various political parties, including the ruling CPI(M) and the opposition UDF.
"It's a fraud. As a result, all agencies that investigate fraud should investigate (this case). That is my demand," Javadekar, who is in Thrissur, said.
The senior BJP leader, who is the party's Kerala in-charge, claimed that the people have lost faith in the probe by the state government agencies and alleged that "it's all whitewash".
The senior BJP leader's statement came days after the party claimed that Vijayan could face an investigation on corruption charges over the alleged "indictment" of his daughter Veena's firm for receiving Rs 1.7 crore from Cochin Minerals and Rutile Limited (CMRL) without providing any service.
Javadekar, in a post on social media platform 'X' (formerly twitter), said on Saturday that not only the ruling LDF but also the opposition Congress-led UDF were involved in corruption in the southern state.
Referring to the alleged financial dealings of the UDF leaders with the Kochi-based firm, he said, "Yet another skeleton has tumbled out of the cupboard of Kerala CM, UDF & LDF. It's a curious case of corruption where the owner of the company which has given ? 96 crores to various politicians & bureaucrats, has accepted that he has paid the money. One recipient is CM's Daughter Veena who has received ? 1.7 crore for doing nothing. More absurd is the support of Congress to the scam," he tweeted.
Javadekar attacked Congress leader and Leader of Opposition in the State Assembly V D Satheesan for his reported remarks that "to take money from business houses for running political activities is normal."
"Mr. Satheeshan, let me remind you that politicians collect funds for the party and deposit in party accounts, not in private accounts. This money was paid to overlook the violations done by the company in pollution and other matters. This is open and shut case of corruption. This must be enquired by serious fraud agencies," he tweeted.
The BJP has said the New Delhi bench of the Income Tax Interim Settlement Board recently ruled that the money was given considering the relationship with a 'prominent person'.
The party has said Veena and her company, Exalogic Solutions, had agreed to supply CMRL with IT, marketing consulting, and software services.
However, the income tax examination discovered that no services were provided.
Referring to various allegations against the Chief Minister and his office, including the SNC Lavalin case, gold smuggling case and Life Mission scam, Javadekar alleged it is not a government led by the Communist Party of India (Marxist), but a dispensation of the "Corruption Party of India."
He alleged that the anti-corruption agencies of the state government have failed to properly investigate various "serious corruption charges" against the Chief Minister's Office (CMO).
ALSO READ | Row as Kerala CM’s daughter named in I-T report
Strongly defending Veena, the CPI(M) has claimed that Vijayan's daughter had not done anything illegal and all the dealings of her IT firm were transparent.
Party leaders said the money laundering allegation on part of her financial transactions with a private minerals company would not stand as all the dealings were through banks.
As the news report snowballed into a political row, the BJP attacked Chief Minister Vijayan and urged him to break his silence over the allegations cropping up against his daughter.
The Congress, however, went soft on the matter, prompting the BJP to question the grand old party for not raising it in the just concluded Assembly session.
Leader of Opposition in the Assembly V D Satheesan rejected the criticism by saying that even if the opposition had given a notice for adjournment over the issue, the CM would not have replied.