k-kavitha-bail-plea-reserved-by-delhi-high-court

The Rouse Avenue Court recently took notice of the Enforcement Directorate's supplementary prosecution complaint against BRS leader K Kavitha and others in connection with the excise policy money laundering case.

 

Special Judge Kaveri Baweja acknowledged the chargesheet and scheduled a production warrant for K Kavitha on June 3, 2024. The court also recognized other accused individuals mentioned in the case.

 

The Enforcement Directorate (ED) recently filed a supplementary prosecution complaint in the Excise Policy money laundering case at the Rouse Avenue Court. This chargesheet implicated BRS Leader K Kavitha and several others, including Chanpreet Singh, Damodar, Prince Singh, and Arvind Kumar.

 

On May 27, the Delhi High Court reserved its decision on K Kavitha's bail plea, filed in both the ED and CBI cases related to the scrapped Excise policy of Delhi. Kavitha's plea highlighted her maternal responsibilities and alleged attempts to implicate her by members of the ruling party.

 

In her plea, Kavitha emphasised the lack of concrete evidence supporting the allegations against her and questioned the legality of her arrest under section 19 of PMLA. She argued that the Prosecution Complaints lacked corroboration and evidence, making her arrest unjustified.

 

Previously, on May 6, the Rouse Avenue Court dismissed K Kavitha's bail petitions related to the CBI and ED cases concerning the Excise Policy case. Kavitha was arrested by the ED on March 15, 2024, and by the CBI on April 11, 2024.

 

The CBI's remand application highlighted the need for Kavitha's arrest to conduct custodial interrogation and uncover larger conspiracies related to the Excise Policy. The CBI inquiry was initiated based on findings indicating violations of various regulations.

 

Both the ED and the CBI alleged irregularities in modifying the excise policy, including undue favours to licence holders and financial losses to the exchequer. The beneficiaries were accused of diverting gains to officials and falsifying accounts to evade detection.

 

According to allegations, the Excise Department refunded earnest money deposits and waived licence fees against regulations, resulting in significant financial losses. These actions allegedly occurred without proper authorization, leading to substantial losses to the government.