NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Tuesday granted bail to Bharat Rashtra Samithi (BRS) MLC K Kavitha, daughter of former Telangana Chief Minister K Chandrasekhar Rao, in the highly controversial Delhi excise policy case. The grant by the court followed a heated exchange that found fault with the investigations being undertaken solely by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) and the Enforcement Directorate (ED).
The Supreme Court bench comprising Justices BR Gavai and KV Viswanathan was neither impressed nor satisfied with the probe, insisting that the investigating agencies come up with concrete evidence that link Kavitha with the alleged scam. "What is the material to show that she was involved in the crime?" Justice Gavai asked a well-stocked courtroom that waited for a substantial answer from the prosecution.
K Kavitha, who has been in custody since March 15, has maintained that she had no role in the alleged criminal conspiracy revolving around the Delhi excise policy. Senior lawyer Mukul Rohatgi, representing Kavitha, submitted the probe had achieved finality, with no incriminating material coming up against her. He submitted that parity had to be granted in relation to the bail that was accorded to senior Delhi AAP leader Manish Sisodia, who is incidentally also facing similar charges in the same case.
However, the agencies were not willing to give in. Another allegation was levelled by the CBI and ED, through Additional Solicitor General SV Raju, alleging Kavitha had destroyed evidence by formatting her mobile. The defence, however, pooh-poohed the claim as "bogus," adding that nothing illegal was detected in the raids and searches.
The high-profile case has, in fact, dragged various key figures deep into this nexus of allegations. According to the CBI and ED, Kavitha played an important role in the so-called "South Group," a clout of businessmen and politicians alleged to have siphoned ₹100 crore in kickbacks to the AAP in return for changes in policy.
The Supreme Court decision granting bail to Kavitha differs from the earlier verdicts given by the Delhi High Court, who had denied her petitions and even labeled her as one of the primary conspirators in the scandal. Difference in judicial opinions reflects a constant debate over credibility in investigation.
ALSO WATCH: