Relief can derail probe: ED opposes BRS legislator K Kavitha’s interim bail plea

Special counsel Zoheb Hossain, however, opposed the bail plea, stating that the proviso to PMLA Section 45 is only applicable to women who lack agency and not to public figures or leading politicians. Under this proviso, it is on the court’s discretion to release the accused on bail if she is a woman, even under the stringent PMLA relaxing its bail requirements.

The ED took Kavitha — a member of the Telangana Legislative Council and daughter of former chief minister K Chandrashekar Rao — into custody from Hyderabad on March 15, and produced her before the Rouse Avenue Court the next day. She was sent to ED custody for seven days, and the court on March 23 granted the agency her custody for three more days. Following this, she was sent to judicial custody until April 9.

“…If your lordships allow her (Kavitha) to be with the son for a month, how would the heavens fall? Where will the ED go? Where would the accused go? No immediate interrogation is required which can’t wait these few weeks,” said Singhvi, adding that Kavitha’s child required the emotional support of her mother during his exams.

Countering this, the ED said that it was at the stage of making a major breakthrough and any interim relief to Kavitha could derail the probe. “There are witnesses who have been called upon and forced to retract their statements (by Kavitha). At the behest of Kavitha, there was an attempt to make one of the main witnesses, her CA, retract the statement,” said Hossain.

Mentioning that the “accused was a very influential person”, Hossain also said that accused Arun Pillai (who was allegedly Kavitha’s proxy) retracted his statements a few days after Kavitha was summoned. “The moment the master finds out that her proxy has made a statement, she forces him to retract,” he said.

Hossain also argued that Kavitha’s husband, elder son, and sister were enough to provide her son the support he required. “Seven out of his 12 exam papers are already over… he is not alone,” said the counsel.

Singhvi countered back by saying that “no one could be a substitute for a mother”, and asked Hossain why he was opening the case diary and arguing on merits during the hearing of an interim bail plea; Singhvi also called the ED an “unfair” prosecuting agency.

After both the counsel concluded their arguments, Special Judge Kaveri Baweja reserved an order for deciding on Kavitha’s interim bail plea on April 8.

Earlier in its remand application, the ED had alleged that Kavitha “conspired with top AAP leaders and gave them kickbacks to the tune of Rs 100 crore and in exchange, and got undue favours in the formulation and implementation of the Delhi excise policy”. It has also been alleged in the plea that Kavitha “orchestrated” a deal with Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal and his former deputy Manish Sisodia, wherein she and other members of the ‘South Group’ paid kickbacks “through a string of intermediaries and middlemen” to gain access to the excise policy formation.