Thiruvananthapuram | A special court here on Thursday rejected the clean chit given by the vigilance bureau to ADGP M R Ajithkumar in connection with a complaint accusing him of amassing disproportionate assets, saying a prima facie case was made out to proceed further with the matter.

Enquiry Commissioner and Special Judge Manoj A rejected the report submitted by the Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau (VACB), saying that the probe was "not conducted fairly and properly" and it was initiated "for name's sake" to save Ajithkumar from the "clutches of law".

"The facts on record reveal that, from the initial stage itself, an attempt was made to sabotage the enquiry / investigation initiated against the suspected officer (Ajithkumar). Furthermore, the so-called enquiry was initiated for name's sake, intended to save him from the clutches of the law," the court said.

The court's order came on a plea by a lawyer -- Neyyattinkara P Nagaraj -- challenging the clean chit given to Ajithkumar.

Nagaraj had claimed that there was no fair and proper enquiry and a deliberate attempt was made to suppress material facts from the court.

While rejecting the vigilance enquiry report, the court said the investigation was carried out and a report was prepared contrary to the guidelines laid down by the Supreme Court and the mandate of the Vigilance Manual as no preliminary enquiry was carried out.

It said that once a five-member team headed by the State Police Chief found that the allegations against Ajithkumar revealed commission of an offence under the Prevention of Corruption Act, a preliminary enquiry was mandated.

However, all the procedures were violated "only to save an individual officer", it said, adding that there was "no meaningful and effective enquiry".

The court was also of the view that facts of the case point towards "an invisible penetration by someone into the enquiry that leads to the preparation of a report favourable to the suspected officer".

"The enquiry report is a subservient report prepared for those who need reports like the present one," it said.

It further said that the officer who carried out the investigation only attempted to collect evidence that would disprove the allegations against Ajithkumar.

The court also noted that while the enquiry officer recorded statements of Ajithkumar and his family members, no attempt was made to hear what the complainant had to say.

"So, the procedure adopted by the enquiry officer cannot be justified in law. He has provided every chance to the suspected officer to justify his acts, rather than adopting a fair procedure, according to the law, to conduct a fair enquiry and to submit a fair report.

"This circumstance itself indicates that, in the initial stage, the enquiry officer intended to exonerate his official superior by whatever means, including adopting illegal ways and procedures not sanctioned by law, and disobeying the Supreme Court judgment," the court said in its 114-page order.

The court said it was a fit case to proceed further with the complaint and posted the matter for examination of the complainant and any witnesses.