Kerala vigilance books DIG for alleged bribery

The Kerala Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau (VACB) has registered a corruption case against Deputy Inspector General (DIG) of Prisons M K Vinod Kumar for allegedly demanding and accepting bribes from prisoners and their relatives in exchange for granting parole and other jail facilities.

According to Vigilance officials, the case has been registered by Special Investigation Unit-II under Sections 7A and 7B of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. Section 7A deals with the offence of taking “undue advantage” to influence a public servant by corrupt or illegal means, while Section 7B pertains to a public servant accepting or obtaining a bribe in return for performing or influencing official duties. Both offences carry a punishment of three to seven years of imprisonment along with a fine.

Vigilance officials said a preliminary inquiry was initiated following a tip-off, which revealed that Kumar allegedly received bribe money not directly, but through UPI transfers routed to the bank accounts of his relatives. Such indirect receipt of illegal gratification is specifically covered under the amended provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act.

The probe has also unearthed suspicious financial transactions involving a relative of Kodi Suni, the prime accused in the 2012 murder of Revolutionary Marxist Party (RMP) leader T P Chandrasekharan, giving the case wider criminal and security ramifications.

M K Vinod Kumar is currently posted as DIG at the Prison Department headquarters. While Vigilance officials have not yet officially detailed all his previous postings, he has held senior positions within the prison administration, which gave him significant authority over parole approvals and prison-related facilities. No earlier vigilance or corruption case against him has been publicly reported so far.

Officials said investigators are now collecting transaction details, bank statements, and digital payment records of the officer and his relatives, besides seeking information from prison department officials across the state. Kumar is expected to be interrogated shortly as part of the ongoing investigation.

Meanwhile, the VACB has submitted a report to the state government recommending Kumar’s suspension, stating that his continuation in office could adversely affect the probe. Vigilance has also indicated that it may recommend a separate investigation into whether the officer amassed assets disproportionate to his known sources of income, a step generally taken when long-term or systemic corruption is suspected.

Senior vigilance officials described the allegations as grave, as they involve a high-ranking officer allegedly exploiting prisoners and their families a vulnerable section and misusing his official position to influence matters affecting personal liberty.

The case is at a preliminary stage, and officials stressed that criminal liability will be determined only after completion of the investigation and trial. Further details regarding the alleged extent of corruption and the officer’s past roles are expected to emerge once the probe progresses and formal charge sheets are filed.