Justice A M Shaffique made this observation when a petition by Saritha S Nair, prime accused in the scam, seeking to set aside the appointment of the commission, came up before the court.
The court held that if the petitioner had any complaint against the commission, she can very well submit it before the commission.
The appointment of the judicial commission was made under the Commission of Inquiry Act under the control of government.
During the course of arguments, even though the petitioner's counsel sought for a direction to produce the files relating to the commission's appointment, the court declined it.
More From This Section
The case has been posted to next week.
Alleging that constitution of the commission was 'politically motivated' and violated her rights, Saritha had approached the court seeking to set aside its appointment.
According to the petitioner, the proceedings of the commission, headed by Justice S Sivarajan, retired High Court judge, would directly affect her rights as accused. She had to abide with the commission's directions which was 'violative of protection given to an accused by the Constitution'.
Saritha and co-accused Biju Radhakrishnan had allegedly cheated several investors in Kerala promising to install solar energy solutions and wind energy farms.
The Oommen Chandy government had to face the heat after the scam came to light in June last year, as three of his personal staff were found to be involved.
The opposition had disrupted the proceedings of the state assembly for days demanding Chandy's resignation.