Delhi court enquiries CBI to reply on bail plea of K Kavitha

A Delhi court on Monday served notice on the CBI in response to a bail application submitted by K Kavitha, an MLC of the Bharat Rashtra Samiti, regarding the money laundering case related to the now-defunct Delhi liquor policy.

Image Source -thedailyguardian.com

By April 20, Kavitha had asked the CBI to respond, per the bench of special judge Kaveri Baweja. The court is supposed to hear the matter on April 22. For the purpose of standing for the Lok Sabha, the Telangana MLC has asked for temporary bail. 

In this very court, she has already requested bail as usual. The court has also sent out a letter on her regular bail plea. Kavitha has claimed that her detention was an intentional ploy to keep her from taking part in the general election campaign in her bid for regular bail in the CBI case. 

Also Read: Rahul Gandhi’s Legal Woes Continue: Gujarat High Court Rejects Plea in ‘Modi Surname’ Case

The arrest of the applicant by the Enforcement Directorate on 15.03.2024 just a day before declaration of election schedule and by CBI on 11.04.2024 i.e., less than 10 days before the commencement of nomination exercise in the State of Telangana is not a mere coincidence. The arrest of the Petitioner is nothing but a method devised by the ruling party at the Centre to deprive her and her party of a level playing field in the upcoming elections, the application says. 

Kavitha was given custody of the CBI by the judge in a corruption case regarding the alleged liquor policy scheme till April 23. On their way out of the courtroom, the BRS MLC made the statement, "This was not CBI custody, but BJP custody." 

After three days of police detention, the CBI asked the court to keep her in judicial custody for another week. Their main arguments were her contradictory answers and her flat-out reluctance to participate. 

The agency went on to say that she was a powerful politician, that she could influence witnesses, that the investigation, which is in a "very crucial stage," would not be affected, and that there were reasonable suspicions that she could alter evidence. 

Legal representatives Nitesh Rana and Deepak Nagar argued against the CBI's claims, arguing that the MLC does not have adequate grounds to request judicial detention based on the agency's claims that the defendant has not cooperated.