SC issues notices to ED, CBI on K Kavitha's plea seeking bail in Delhi excise policy case; lists matter for August 20

The Supreme Court issued notices to the Enforcement Directorate and the Central Bureau of Investigation on Monday in relation to BRS leader K Kavitha’s plea seeking bail in the now-scrapped Delhi Excise Policy case. The apex court was hearing pleas by Kavitha challenging the earlier Delhi High Court verdict that denied her bail in the corruption and money laundering cases.

The SC further posted the BRS leader's pleas seeking bail for hearing on August 20.

A bench of Justices B R Gavai and K V Viswanathan heard the 46-year-old politician’s petitions, whose lawyer, Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi argued that Kavitha had already served five months in prison.


Arguing that she was entitled to bail, Rohatgi cited the Supreme Court's ruling and the orders issued in the petitions filed by Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal and Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) leader Manish Sisodia. The apex court had earlier granted interim bail to Kejriwal in the money laundering case linked to the alleged sca; while Sisodia was granted bail in both the corruption and money laundering cases linked to the same case.

K Kavitha was arrested by the ED on March 15 and then the CBI on April 11.

The daughter of former Telangana chief minister K Chandrashekar Rao has been accused of being a key member of the "South Group", which allegedly paid the ruling AAP in Delhi kickbacks of Rs 100 crore in return for a big share of liquor licences in the national capital.

Since her ED arrest from her Banjara Hills home in Hyderabad, Kavitha has been lodged in Tihar jail.

Delhi HC dismissal

The Delhi High Court had on July 1 dismissed Kavitha's bail pleas in both the cases, saying she was prima facie one of the main conspirators in the criminal conspiracy related to the formation and implementation of the now-scrapped Delhi excise policy.

While dismissing her bail pleas, the high court had said no case for grant of regular bail was made for now as the investigation is at a crucial stage.

It had rejected her plea for relief on the grounds of being a woman, saying as a well-educated person and a former MP, she cannot be equated to a vulnerable female, and the court cannot lose sight of the "serious allegations" against her.