Kerala Home Minister Ramesh Chennithala has directed the state’s Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau (VACB) to examine a former contractor’s claim that Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar demanded a Rs 2 crore bribe in 2006, when he was the state’s Public Works Department (PWD) secretary. The allegation is unproven, a 2006–07 vigilance inquiry reportedly cleared Kumar, and he has not publicly responded.
The complaint ties the alleged demand to a road project on MC Road and to the 2006 suicide of Malaysian engineer Lee See Been. It is the second Kerala move against Kumar in a month: on October 4, Chennithala ordered a preliminary inquiry into the same project after a complaint from Congress leader Malayinkeezhu Venugopal. Both come as the Congress and other opposition parties protest Kumar’s handling of the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls.
What the new complaint alleges
Sajan, a former contractor from Kollam district, filed the complaint with the Vigilance Director. His account rests largely on what he says Lee told him, which investigators will now have to test.
- Withheld cheques. Kumar allegedly held back cheques worth about Rs 17 crore for completed work, even though engineers had approved the bills.
- The demand. Lee, PATI-BEL’s project engineer, allegedly told Sajan that Kumar would not release the cheques unless the company paid Rs 2 crore.
- The refusal. When Sajan suggested paying to settle the matter, he says Lee’s side replied that PATI-BEL’s management “were not permitting them to obtain the cheques by paying a bribe.”
- Stopgap funds. Lee allegedly moved money from the company’s Bengaluru project to pay some contractors and workers.
- The death. Sajan claims the payment squeeze and the alleged demand contributed to Lee’s suicide in 2006, and that Lee’s note referred to Kumar. He says Lee’s family in Malaysia later told company staff what the note said.
- The old probe. He says the 2006 Vigilance team never questioned him or others with direct knowledge, and offers Lee’s family, ex-employees and other witnesses.
According to Times Kerala, the government’s legal advice from the Vigilance prosecution wing held that what a dead person told others while alive can be treated as primary evidence. That opinion is what lets a second-hand account like Sajan’s go forward.
The money in dispute
Thomas Isaac to The Week (Oct 2026); Sajan complaint as reported Nov 4, 2026 · 5 figures
The alleged demand is small next to the bills it would have freed, which is why the gap between Sajan’s Rs 17 crore and Isaac’s Rs 13 crore matters: PWD payment records could settle which figure is right.
How the case got here
Timeline · 11 dates from The Week, Business Standard, The Federal, National Herald, PTI
Kumar was moved out of the PWD within two weeks of Lee’s death and left Kerala for central service by the end of 2007; the file stayed shut until the SIR row put him back in the spotlight.
Where the case stands
Procedure · 2 complaints, 1 inquiry; from PTI via Deccan Chronicle and Times Kerala
This is still a preliminary stage. Vigilance has asked the Home Department for permission to register a case, and the fresh complaint will be examined by the team already looking into the KSTP project; no FIR has been reported.
What is claimed, and what is contested
Several core facts differ between accounts. None of the claims below has been tested in court.
| Claim | Who makes it | What cuts against it or is unknown |
| Kumar demanded Rs 2 crore to release cheques | Sajan, relaying what Lee told him | Second-hand; no documentary evidence made public |
| Rs 17 crore in approved bills was withheld | Sajan | Thomas Isaac, finance minister in 2006, puts pending bills at Rs 13 crore |
| Lee’s suicide note named Kumar | Sajan; Chennithala | Journalist M G Radhakrishnan, who covered the case, says he never saw a note naming Kumar ; the family note was reportedly kept by Malaysian police |
| The 2006 probe was derailed by outside pressure | Venugopal complaint; Chennithala | Reports say Vigilance cleared Kumar in 2006–07; Isaac says it stalled because the company would not pursue it |
| Payment delays drove the project’s distress | Sajan; Isaac | The PWD at the time blamed PATI-BEL for delays; the firm blamed slow land handover |
| Cause of death was suicide | Most reports | PATI-BEL’s obituary cited a cardiac arrest |
Smaller discrepancies also run through the coverage: the contract is put at Rs 215 crore or Rs 216 crore, and the engineer’s name appears as both Lee See Been and Lee Been Seen.
The political backdrop
The case reopened while Kumar faces a national campaign for his resignation. Opposition parties and protest groups allege the SIR has removed more than 130 million people from voter rolls, a figure reported by Business Standard as the protesters’ claim. Kumar has in the past accused the opposition of spreading misinformation about the Election Commission.
The government’s position. Chief Minister V D Satheesan has denied any political vendetta, saying the state acted on a complaint and will decide after the Vigilance report (The Federal). Chennithala told the Assembly the inquiry was progressing and that Kumar’s alleged mention in the note could not be ignored (National Herald).
The case for reopening. CPI(M) leader Thomas Isaac argues that a CEC must meet a high bar of integrity, so his record deserves scrutiny. Isaac also noted the PWD never imposed liquidated damages on PATI-BEL despite blaming it for delays.
The case against. Former Kerala chief secretary E K Bharat Bhushan called Kumar competent and objective, and said a controversy after 20 years makes no sense. Two other preliminary inquiries from that period, on a contractor overpayment and a bridge, reportedly found no wrongdoing. Business Standard reports Vigilance is reluctant to revisit its findings without fresh evidence.
Both complaints come from the Congress side of Kerala politics: Venugopal is a KPCC leader, and the ministers ordering the probe belong to the Congress-led government that took office in May 2026.
