Delhi excise case: BRS leader Kavitha sent to ED custody till March 23

it is evident that Ms K Kavitha is involved in the acts of payment of kickbacks to Govt functionaries to gain illegal benefits in the Excise Policy 2021-22 formulation and implementation… Ms K Kavitha is actually involved in the transfer of PoC [proceeds of crime] of Rs. 100 Cr… which was paid to the AAP leaders,” the agency said in its submission to the Rouse Avenue Court.

Her remand came on a day a metropolitan court granted bail to Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal in connection with two ED complaints for skipping its summons in the liquor policy case. His senior party colleagues — Manish Sisodia and Sanjay Singh — are in jail for their alleged involvement in formulating and implementing the excise policy which raised the profit margins of liquor wholesalers and retailers. The ED has claimed Delhi’s ruling dispensation extended them the favour in return for money.

Senior advocate Vikram Chaudhary, appearing for Kavitha, said the ED had flouted Supreme Court directions while arresting her. The top court is expected to hear her case on March 19.

The arrest is a blatant abuse of power. They have violated the apex court’s orders… It is a black day in the administration of justice where the SC proceedings are violated… They said in front of the court that they will not summon the accused till the next date of hearing. Following this they sought adjournments. The moment the senior judge (S K Kaul) retired, they started issuing summons to the accused,” said Chaudhary.

Chaudhary alleged that Kavitha was arrested after sunset. Women cannot be arrested after sunset, as per the law.

Special Judge Nagpal asked the agency why it couldn’t wait for three days till March 19 when the matter was expected to be heard in the Supreme Court.

Special Counsel Zoheb Hossain, representing the ED, said that there was no undertaking that it would not take any coercive step against Kavitha.

In case there was an ever-continuing undertaking by us of no coercive action and that we won’t call you, then in January when we summoned Kavitha…. you should have moved a contempt (plea) in the Supreme Court. Where is the contempt (plea)?” Hossain submitted.

Hossain also said that the accused was arrested at 5:20 pm which was before sunset. “The search concluded at 6:45 pm… Around 20 people barged in unlawfully and obstructed our search,” he said, adding that the ED was not responsible for the delay in finishing the search.

Hossain said the arrest was important as Kavitha could potentially destroy evidence. The ED, in its submission to the court, has alleged that she had submitted nine formatted phones for examination in March 2023.

When asked who deleted the data in those devices and on whose instructions, Ms K Kavitha was evasive and couldn’t give any explanation for those formatted phones,” read the application. “…This court is of the opinion that provisions of PMLA Section 19, related to the applicant’s arrest, have been substantially complied with, and keeping in view the nature of allegations levelled against accused and the role played by her in commission of the alleged offence, there is a need to remand her to ED custody for the investigation,” said Judge Nagpal.

It was in 2022 that BJP leaders in New Delhi accused Kavitha of being involved in the liquor policy storm. The allegations surfaced at a time when the BJP was trying to make inroads in Telangana.

In two prosecution complaints, equivalent to chargesheets, the ED had claimed that members of the so-called ‘South Group’ — which they claimed Kavitha was associated with — paid bribes to exploit loopholes in the excise policy that would secure their uninhibited access to various wholesale businesses and retail zones in violation of rules.

The ED complaint stated that to “recover the kickbacks given by the ‘South Group’,” partners of the group were given 65 per cent stake in a firm called Indo Spirits in collusion with its owner Sameer Mahendru, who is also an accused in the case.

The ED complaint against Kavitha had relied on the statement of Mahendru to allege that he was approached by members of the South Group who expressed interest in his company.