Supreme Court Questions Evidence Against BRS Leader K Kavitha in Delhi Excise Policy Scam

The Supreme Court on Tuesday inquired about the evidence the Enforcement Directorate (ED) and the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) possessed regarding the involvement of BRS leader K Kavitha in the controversial Delhi excise policy scam.

During a hearing of Kavitha’s bail applications in connection with corruption and money laundering cases, Justices B R Gavai and K V Viswanathan pressed the probe agencies to substantiate their claims of her involvement. Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi, representing Kavitha, argued for her bail, noting that the investigations by both agencies had concluded.

READ ALSO  Supreme Court Transfers Investigation in Gorakhpur Minor Girl Kidnapping Case to Delhi Police

Rohatgi also pointed to a previous Supreme Court verdict that granted bail to AAP leader Manish Sisodia, who is a co-accused in the same cases. On the other hand, Additional Solicitor General S V Raju, representing the ED and CBI, contended that Kavitha’s actions, including the alleged destruction/formatting of her mobile phone, amounted to tampering with evidence—a claim Rohatgi dismissed as “bogus.”

Play button

“What is the material to show that she was involved in the crime?” the bench asked Raju, highlighting the need for concrete evidence in the high-profile case.

READ ALSO  2G scam case: Glaring illegalities in judgment acquitting A Raja and others, CBI tells Delhi HC

The legal battle follows the Delhi High Court’s July 1 decision to deny Kavitha bail, labeling her as a prima facie key conspirator in the criminal conspiracy linked to the formulation and implementation of the now-defunct Delhi Excise Policy 2021-22. The high court’s ruling emphasized her alleged central role in the scheme, which has led to significant legal and political fallout.

READ ALSO  नागरिक अधिकारों से ज्यादा जरूरी है पर्यावरण: सुप्रीम कोर्ट
Ad 20- WhatsApp Banner

Law Trend
Law Trendhttps://lawtrend.in/
Legal News Website Providing Latest Judgments of Supreme Court and High Court

Related Articles

Latest Articles