K Kavitha seeks interim bail in excise policy case citing exception to women under PMLA; ED opposes

A Delhi court on Thursday reserved its order in the interim bail plea filed by Bharat Rashtra Samithi (BRS) leader K Kavitha in the money laundering case against her in connection with the Delhi excise policy scam. .Special Judge (PC Act) Kaveri Baweja of the Rouse Avenue Courts reserved her verdict after hearing Kavitha and the Enforcement Directorate (ED).Senior Advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, appearing for Kavitha, argued that she should get the benefit of bail under the proviso to Section 45 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA).The proviso confers discretion on the court to release woman-accused on bail notwithstanding the rigorous conditions which are otherwise required to be satisfied for bail under PMLA."The first point flows from Section 45 PMLA itself. It has so-called twin conditions... I am interested in proviso. It says woman. My point is that of course your lordship is not obliged to give me bail. But equally your lordship is not hidebound or straitjacketed by the twin conditions," Singhvi said.The idea of the legislature to create a separate regime here and it must be given the proper effect in letter and spirit, he added.He also pointed out that Kavitha's son would need her presence since he is currently giving his exams. The ED opposed the bail on both counts.Advocate Zoheb Hossain, appearing for ED, said that the exception to women under the proviso to Section 45 of PMLA is meant for women who lack agency."It is not for a woman who is in public life and leading politician of the state," he said.Regarding Kavitha's son's exam, it was stated that seven out of twelve exams are already over and he also has his father and brother to support him.The Court eventually reserved its verdict and said that the same will be pronounced on April 8, Monday..Background.Kavitha was arrested on March 15 evening from Hyderabad, hours after an ED team searched the premises and interrogated her.She is among one of the most high-profile politicians to be arrested by the ED in the Delhi excise policy case.Other political leaders arrested in this case include Delhi Chief Minster Arvind Kejriwal and former Delhi Deputy Chief Minister Manish Sisodia.All of them are accused of being part of a conspiracy to frame the now-scrapped Delhi Excise Policy for 2021-22 in a manner that enabled money laundering and benefitted certain liquor lobby groups..The ED has claimed Kavitha was linked to a "South Group" lobby of liquor traders who were trying to play a larger role under the excise policy.It has been alleged that one of the accused in the case, Vijay Nair, received kickbacks to the tune of at least ₹100 crores on behalf of AAP leaders from the "South Group", allegedly controlled by Sarath Reddy, K Kavitha and Magunta Srinivasulu Reddy.Kavitha has claimed that she is innocent and counter-alleged that the Central government was misusing the ED to gain ground in Telangana..On March 16, the Rouse Avenue Court had remanded her to ED custody for a week.On March 22, the Supreme Court denied any urgent relief to her and added that she would have to approach the trial court for bail.On March 26, she was sent to judicial custody by the trial court until April 9.Meanwhile, she filed the present plea for interim bail..Hearing Today.During the hearing today, Senior Advocate Singhvi, appearing for Kavitha, highlighted the proviso to Section 45 of PMLA which allows court to release woman-accused on bail notwithstanding the rigorous bail conditions under PMLA.He also argued that the son of the accused is giving exams and would need his mother for emotional support."The child is not a toddler. He is 16 years old but the issue here is of emotional support of the mother. Think of the shock of the arrest of mother on child," Singhvi said.He also highlighted the lectures of Prime Minister Narendra Modi about the pressure on children during exams. "The Prime Minister gives lectures on exam pressure on All India Radio... This pressure is not an imaginary phenomenon. The perspective of the mother is not substitutable by the father or sister. It is not substitutable by a maasi also," he said.He also pointed out that Kavitha's husband is already fighting the legal battle in Delhi."The ecosystem of a mother being there is different. ED says son is 16 years old and he has a father and a mama. But that cannot substitute for a mother. The father of the child is already fighting these legal battles in Delhi. The child is in Telangana," he said..Advocate Zoheb Hossain, appearing for the Enforcement Directorate (ED), said that the exception to women under the proviso to Section 45 of PMLA is meant for women who lack agency. "It is not for a woman who is in public life and leading politician of the state," he said.Hossain also said how Kavitha was one of the main accused in the case. "The lady in question is one of the prime movers of giving bribes. She is also a beneficiary through her proxies. This is not based only on statements but based on documents and WhatsApp chats. This is all corroborated," he contended.He also claimed that Kavitha destroyed evidence against her including evidence on her mobile phone."My lady will have to decide the extent of her involvement and the material against her. I have forensic report which shows how evidence was destroyed. She deleted evidence in her mobile phone. This was done on the date she was issued summons. There was no data in apps like FaceTime. On March 11, she said she will produce the phone on the next date. On the next date she produced 9 phones. But these were formatted. She said she did not do it. When we pressed, she was evasive. The forensic report shows they were formatted after March 11," Hossain argued.He also claimed that ED is the verge of a breakthrough in the probe and granting interim bail to Kavitha will derail the investigation."We are at the stage of making a major breakthrough. Any interim relief will derail the probe. She is very influential and will influence the people," it was contended.In this regard, Hossain also alleged that the accused had already attempted to influence witnesses."We want to highlight that there is influencing of witnesses. Attempt is to make witnesses retract the statement. A person has come forward and told us he was forced. There is destruction of evidence as well," it was stated.Regarding Kavitha's son's exam, it was stated,"Her son's 7 out of 12 papers are already over. He is not alone. He has a father and an elder brother. The young man is not alone.""He is a boy, not a man," Singhvi interjected."In the Indian family, maasi is part of a close knit family and she can provide support," Hossain continued.There is no evidence to suggest that the young person suffers from any anxiety disorders and these are general arguments, no documents to prove, he added..Read Kavitha's previous arguments in the case here..Follow Bar and Bench channel on WhatsAppDownload the Bar and Bench Mobile app for instant access to the latest legal news.