This petition is to quash the First Information Report and all further proceedings pursuant thereto under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

2. Petitioner was the Chief Minister of State of Kerala during the relevant period 1991 to 1995. The allegations in the F.I.R. (Annexure-A) relate to a contract entered into between the Managing Director of the Kerala State Civil Suplies Corporation and M/s. Power and Energy (P) Limited, Singapore on 29-11-1991 for the purchase and import of 15,000 Metric tonnes of Palmolein. It is alleged that the petitioner as accused No. 1 along with accused 2 to 5 by abusing their official position as public servants entered into a criminal conspiracy amongst themselves and with A6 and A7, the private firms caused pecuniary loss of about Rs. 2.8 crores and corresponding pecuniary gain to the accused and thereby committed the offences of criminal misconduct and criminal conspiracy.

3. The superintendent of Police, Vigilance Department, conducted preliminary enquiry in the matter from 9-8-1996 to March, 1997. The said enquiry revealed that the accused have committed the offences under Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and Section 120B, I.P.C. and accordingly the case was registered as Cr. 1/97 at Vigilance Special Cell Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram and further investigation continued. It is at this stage the above Crl.M.C. has been filed.

4. The substantial and the only argument advanced by learned Senior Counsel, Mr. M. N. Sukumaran Nayar, is that on the very same allegations a F.I. Statement filed by one Shri M. Vijayakumar, then M.L.A. and presently the Speaker of the Legislative Assembly was found by a Division Bench of this Court that they do not make out prima facie case of commission of any cognizable offence which requires investigation. Learned Senior Counsel took me through the complaints filed by Shri M. Vijayakumar, M.L.A. and the decision of the Single Bench and the Division Bench. According to him, the findings of the Division Bench have concluded the issue and are no longer res integra for the respondents to commence the investigation. The SLP. filed against Writ Appeal judgment was dismissed by the Supreme Court. He further submits that the Division Bench had rightly or wrongly decided substantially on the issue and the law of precedents has to be applied to debar a fresh FIR. The FIR and investigation pursuant thereto by the respondents is, therefore, contrary to the larger principle of res judicata, amounting to abuse of the process of Court and hence it must be quashed.

5. Learned Director General of Prosecution Mr. Kallada Sukumaran, while opposing the stand of the petitioner submitted that earlier Original Petition filed as a public interest litigation has its origin from an earlier O.P. No. 3813 of 1994 which was dismissed by this Court on 4-4-1994 holding that the petitioner's contention therein was on the basis of the report of the Comptrolle and Auditor General (herein after referred to as 'the CAG'). According to the judgment the report by itself was not sufficient to come to a conclusion that an offence has been made out under Section 3 of the Prevention of Corruption Act.

6. Thereafter one Shri M. Vijayakumar, Member of Kerala Legislative Assembly presented a petition dated 15-4-1994 before the Superintendent of Police, Vigilance, to register a case based on certain allegations of corruption in the import of palmolein. The Superintendent of Police informed Shri Vijayakumar on 16-4-1994 (Annexure E) that in the light of G.O. (P) No. 65/92/Vig. dated 12-5-1992 necessary action on the said petition can be taken only on receipt of the orders of the Director of Vigilance and accordingly the said petition was forwarded to the Director of Vigilance Investigation. By a communication dated 4-7-1994 the Deputy Superintendent of Police informed Shri M. Vijayakumar that the allegations were purely based on the observa