K Kavitha’s Bail Plea Denied: Delhi Court Upholds Judicial Custody

High-Profile Politician Denied K Kavitha Interim Relief Amid Allegations of Involvement in Money Laundering Scheme

In a significant development, a Delhi court on Monday rejected the interim bail plea of K Kavitha, a prominent leader of the Bharat Rashtra Samithi (BRS), in connection with the Delhi excise policy case. Special Judge (PC Act) Kaveri Baweja of the Rouse Avenue Courts delivered the verdict after reserving it on April 4. Kavitha, who was arrested on March 15 from Hyderabad following a search and interrogation by the Enforcement Directorate (ED), remains in judicial custody at Tihar Jail. She stands as one of the key figures apprehended by the ED in the aforementioned case, which also includes notable political figures like Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal and former Deputy Chief Minister Manish Sisodia.

The case revolves around allegations of manipulating the now-defunct Delhi Excise Policy for 2021-22, purportedly facilitating money laundering and favoring select liquor lobby groups. According to the ED, Kavitha has purported ties to a lobby of liquor traders identified as the “South Group,” allegedly seeking an expanded role under the excise policy. Notably, Vijay Nair, one of the accused, allegedly received substantial kickbacks, estimated at ₹100 crores, on behalf of AAP leaders from the said group, allegedly controlled by Sarath Reddy, K Kavitha, and Magunta Srinivasulu Reddy.

Kavitha has vehemently denied these allegations, asserting her innocence while accusing the Central government of misusing the ED to score political points in Telangana. Despite her pleas, the Supreme Court, on March 22, declined to provide urgent relief, directing her to seek bail from the trial court. Consequently, she was remanded to judicial custody until April 9, prompting her to file the present plea for interim bail.

During the proceedings, Senior Advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, representing Kavitha, cited Section 45 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), emphasizing the provision for granting bail to women accused, particularly concerning emotional support, especially for her 16-year-old son during his exams. However, Advocate Zoheb Hossain, representing the ED, contested these arguments, highlighting Kavitha’s alleged involvement in the bribery scheme and the destruction of evidence, suggesting a risk of influencing witnesses.

The court’s decision underscores the complexity of the case and its potential ramifications, especially amidst claims of ongoing investigative breakthroughs by the ED. Meanwhile, Kavitha’s son’s ongoing exams further underscore the emotional complexity of the situation, adding another layer to the legal battle ahead.