The Kerala government on Thursday, 20 August told the Kerala High Court that no Vigilance investigation is warranted at present against Director General of Police (DGP) S. Sreejith, IPS, who faced allegations of travelling to Dubai without prior foreign travel permission and attending the inauguration of a private enterprise allegedly linked to him. The submission by a senior Home Department official effectively brought the court proceedings to a close, though the petitioner retains the right to pursue further legal remedies.

What the Allegations Were

The petitioner had alleged that DGP Sreejith availed casual leave and flew to Dubai without securing the mandatory permission required for government officers to travel abroad. He was further alleged to have attended the inauguration of a private enterprise that reportedly had connections to him — a claim the Vigilance Department's own compliance report had dismissed as false and vexatious.

The petition before Justice A. Badharudeen challenged that very compliance report, arguing it did not adequately address the substance of the allegations.

The Government's Stand Before Court

Additional Chief Secretary, Home and Vigilance Department, Minhaj Alam, appeared personally before Justice Badharudeen after the court directed his presence, citing concerns that the government had not complied with an earlier order. Alam submitted that he had granted the petitioner an independent personal hearing — in the absence of Sreejith — as directed, and had thereafter concluded that a Vigilance probe was not required at this stage.

The court had previously ruled that requiring a complainant to participate in a hearing in the presence of the very person against whom allegations were made could not be considered a fair procedure. The petitioner had declined an earlier joint hearing on precisely those grounds, asserting his willingness to appear only in an independent setting.

Court's Warning to Officials

While closing the proceedings, Justice Badharudeen issued a pointed warning to government officials on compliance with court orders. The court cautioned that repeated lapses could result in mandatory personal appearances and even contempt proceedings.

The bench also orally directed officials to file proper petitions when seeking further orders from the court, instead of routing such requests through clerks or peons. The court warned that costs could be imposed if such procedural lapses recurred.

What Happens Next

The court order leaves the petitioner free to pursue appropriate legal remedies, including a fresh challenge if new evidence or procedural grounds emerge. DGP Sreejith, who was recently promoted to his current rank, faces no immediate Vigilance action under the government's current position. The matter, however, is not formally closed at law — the petitioner's options remain open.