Delhi Liquor Scam: ED files caveat in Supreme Court in Kavitha’s petition a la P Chidambaram case

HYDERABAD: Directorate of Enforcement (ED) has filed a caveat in the Supreme Court urging the court not to pass any order on the plea of Bharat Rashtra Samithi (BRS) MLC Kavitha Kalvakuntla without hearing the agency.

This seems to be a desperate attempt by the agency, for except in cases where serious political vendetta works beneath the surface, the agency doesn’t seem to file such caveats. Because, it is natural for any court to pass any order after hearing both sides.

The only other prominent case where ED had filed a Caveat in the Supreme Court seeking to be heard was on August 21, 2019 in a petitioned filed by P Chidambaram seeking protection from arrest. The P Chidambaram case is a high-profile case with political connotations.

It appears that the ED is desperately seeking to be heard -- by applying the same yard stick as in the Chidambaram case – even Kavitha’s petition. For, Kavitha’s case also has political overtones. The arrest of Manish Sisodia, Deputy Chief Minister of Delhi, in the Delhi Excise Policy case indicates the same.

Kavitha has approached the Supreme Court questioning the very authority of the ED in summoning a woman for questioning stating that it was complete violation of the law. The Supreme Court, which posted the matter to March 24 had refused to hear the petition urgently and also declined to give any interim directions.

Also Read :- Delhi liquor scam: BRS MLC Kavitha moves SC against ED questioning

In her petition, Kavitha raised the fundamental question on the ED’s authority to quiz a woman at its office. Stating that the ED was summoning a woman for questioning, she said that it was in complete violation of law. Chief Justice of India D Y Chandrachud, before whose bench the petition was filed, admitted it for hearing.

The BRS MLC was questioned for close to nine hours on March 11 in connection with the now-scrapped Delhi Excise Policy case. She was summoned to appear before the investigating agency on March 16. She, however, cited her petition pending before the Supreme Court which had posted the case to March 24. The MLC had sent a detailed note to the ED through BRS general secretary Soma Bharat Kumar. The ED issued fresh summons to her asking her to appear on March 20.

Meanwhile the ED filed a caveat urging the apex court to hear its version in Kavitha’s plea before passing any order.

It maybe recalled that the MLC refused to attend the questioning by the Directorate of Enforcement in connection with Delhi Liquor Scam, citing that he petition was pending before the Supreme Court. Kavitha was supposed to appear before the ED officials on Thursday (March 16). As she skipped the schedule and instead submitted a petition to the ED officials through her representative and BRS leader Soma Bharat Kumar, the ED issued fresh notice asking her to appear on March 20.

The fresh summons follows Kavitha's refusal to appear for an ED summons on Thursday, citing a pending Supreme Court challenge to the summons. Kavitha's six-page representation of the ED, according to reports, was denied.

Also read :- Kavitha Kalvakuntala summoned again by ED on Mar 20 in Delhi excise policy case

Kavitha's lawyer who addressed the media on Thursday had sought an urgent hearing, stating her being invited to the ED office is totally against the law. He also claimed that neither the CBI nor the ED had designated her as an accused. She had submitted the documents requested by the Enforcement Directorate through her legal representation, and she had informed the ED that the case was pending before the Supreme Court.

"I was made to sit in your nice office long after sunset till around 8:30 PM when I was finally permitted to leave and was handed over the subject summons for March 16, 2023," Kavitha claimed in her documents. She further claimed that, "I being a woman and protected by the postulates of law, may not be called to the office of Directorate and that I was always eager and ready to appear through audio/video mode and had also invited the officers at my place which is as per the mandate of law".

Also read :- Kavitha skips Enforcement Directorate interrogation, instead sends documents

Her statement further reads, "I, being a woman and protected by the postulates of law, may not be called to the Enforcement Directorate Office and that I was always willing to appear through audio or video mode and had also invited the officers to my residence, which is as per the mandate of law." However, your good self has denied my request. But I furnished all relevant information, but Enforcement Directorate chose to impound my phone despite there being no directive in the summons that I should bring the phone.