NEW DELHI: Enforcement Directorate (ED) has filed a caveat in Supreme Court in a plea by Telangana CM’s daughter and Bharat Rashtra Samithi (BRS) leader K. Kavitha challenging the summons issued to appear at EDs New Delhi office in relation to Delhi liquor policy case. ED in the caveat has urged the SC to not pass any orders until it hears the federal probe agency.
While challenging the summons, she had sought certain protections to her during the questioning and sought directions to the investigating officers to that effect. Kavitha had approached SC contending that the investigation against her is nothing more than a fishing expedition being undertaken by the Enforcement Directorate solely at the behest of the incumbent ruling political party.
On March 15, a bench headed by CJI DY Chandrachud had agreed to hear her plea on March 24. Kavitha’s plea was mentioned by senior advocate Vikram Chaudhari before a bench of CJI DY Chandrachud and Justice PS Narasimha. Urging the bench to list the plea immediately, Chaudhari said that she had earlier appeared before the ED but the repeated summons was contrary to law because the petitioner was a woman.
“Can a woman be called to the office of the Enforcement Directorate? She is now being summoned by ED for questioning and that it is ‘completely against the law’,” Chaudhari said.Considering Chaudhari’s submissions, CJI although refused to accede to her request for granting interim relief of urgent listing and staying March 16 summons but agreed to list the same on March 24. Although she was grilled by ED on March 11 in the money laundering case and was summoned by ED again for the third time on March 16, but since the SC had agreed to list her plea on March 24, Kavitha had skipped March 16 summons.
She in turn had sent her authorised representative Soma Bharath (a BRS party office bearer) who handed over the case a six-page representation against her deposition along with her bank statement, personal and business details to the investigating officer.
Kavitha in her plea before the SC had also argued that she was although not named in the FIR registered by CBI alleging irregularities in the Delhi Excise Policy but certain members of incumbent ruling political party at Centre made scandalous statements linking her to the policy and the FIR.