5 Feb 2024 3:54 PM GMT
The Enforcement Directorate on Monday (February 5) alleged that Bharat Rashtra Samithi (BRS) leader K Kavitha has been 'avoiding' the central agency's summonses, at the Supreme Court hearing of the legislator's plea in connection with the Delhi excise policy case. The probe agency is currently investigating her role in influencing the now-scrapped liquor policy in the national capital and related bribery allegations.
A bench of Justices Bela M Trivedi and Pankaj Mithal was hearing a writ petition filed under Article 32 of the Constitution by K Kavitha against the summons issued by the ED last year requiring her to appear in Delhi for questioning in connection with the money laundering investigation. In March, this petition was tagged with a 2018 plea filed by Nalini Chidambaram, senior advocate, and wife of former finance minister P Chidambaram, who approached the apex court after the Madras High Court refused to quash the ED summons against her in the Saradha chit fund scam case.
On the last occasion, the top court orally asked the Enforcement Directorate to not summon K Kavitha for questioning till the former Lok Sabha member's plea challenging the central agency's summonses is heard first. On her behalf, Senior Advocate Vikram Chaudhary had requested the court to grant protection from coercive action, in the same way it had protected Nalini Chidambaram. In support of this contention, the senior counsel had pointed to the various statutory relaxations made in criminal law to benefit women, particularly under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002.
Saying that summons could not be deferred sine die, the probe agency initially agreed to defer it for ten days, but eventually, during the last hearing in September, it agreed to not call K Kavitha for questioning till her plea was heard by the top court. Saying that there was no reason to doubt this oral assurance made at the Bar by Additional Solicitor General SV Raju, the court adjourned the hearing without recording the law officer's statement in its order.
Today, ASG Raju complained about the legislator's non-appearance despite the Enforcement Directorate issuing her summonses. "She has not been appearing. She is avoiding summonses."
"You had given a statement before the court and you remember that," Sibal protested.
The law officer however maintained that the oral assurance was only meant to enure till the next date of hearing, and "not for all time". On the other hand, Sibal argued that the matter had to be heard first. At his request, the bench agreed to post K Kavitha's plea for final hearing on Friday, February 16.
Trinamool Congress general secretary Abhishek Banerjee's special leave petition assailing a Delhi High Court order refusing to quash summons issued to him and his wife for appearance in Delhi for interrogation in connection with the coal scam case will also be heard along with K Kavitha's writ petition. In the petition filed by the Banerjees, the first issue is whether the ED can summon them to Delhi when the predicate offence is within the Kolkata jurisdiction. The secondary issue is whether a woman can be summoned to the ED office in view of Section 160 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. In 2022, the apex court stayed the effect and operation of the high court order and directed the agency to interrogate the Banerjees at Kolkata instead of Delhi.
Background
The origin of the controversy is the excise policy framed by the Government of the National Capital of Delhi to boost revenue and reform liquor trade in 2021, which was later withdrawn after allegations of irregularities in implementation were made and Lieutenant-Governor Vinay Kumar Saxena ordered a probe by the Central Bureau of Investigation into the policy. This policy – which sought to completely privatise liquor trade in the national capital – was used to grant undue advantage to private entities at the cost of the public exchequer and smacked of corruption, the Enforcement Directorate and the Central Bureau of Investigation have claimed. The investigations are currently underway and led to the arrest of, among others, Manish Sisodia – the former deputy chief minister of Delhi and a prominent leader of the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP).
In this case, the anti-money laundering agency has also issued summons to K Kavitha, a leader of the Bharat Rashtra Samithi and the daughter of former Telangana chief minister K Chandrasekhar Rao, as a part of its wider probe into the alleged financial irregularities surrounding the now-scrapped liquor policy and the role of a purported 'south liquor lobby'. In March, the Enforcement Directorate summoned her to appear in person in Delhi for questioning in connection with the Delhi excise policy case.
In the same month, the central agency's summons were challenged by the BRS leader. Kavitha, presently an MLA from the Nizamabad local bodies constituency, argued that she has not been named in the first information report (FIR) and that the summons were in the teeth of Section 160 of the Code of Criminal Procedure which protected women from being summoned as a witness to any place other than where they reside.
Case Details
Kalvakuntla Kavitha v. Directorate of Enforcement | Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 103 of 2023