The Supreme Court on Tuesday directed the Enforcement Directorate not to summon Bharat Rashtra Samithi (BRS) leader K Kavitha for questioning in connection with the Delhi Liquor Policy scam case till November 20, in order to ensure that her petition challenging the ED summons was heard first by the court.
The Bench of Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia passed the order on a petition filed by the former Lok Sabha MP against the ED summons issued earlier this year, seeking her appearance in Delhi for questioning in connection with the money laundering investigation.
The Apex Court observed that when a woman was called for questioning as a witness or in whatever capacity, there had to be some safeguards.
It further said that there cannot be a common thread to all the matters since some cases were about abuse of law, while others pertained to other issues.
The Bench then listed the matter for further hearing on November 20.
The writ petition filed by Kavitha was tagged in March 2023 with a petition filed in 2018 by Nalini Chidambaram, Senior Advocate and wife of Congress leader P, Chidambaram, challenging the Madras High Court order, which refused to quash the ED summons against her in the Saradha chit fund scam case.
Appearing for Kavitha, Senior Advocate Vikram Chaudhary urged the court in the last hearing to protect her from coercive action, in the same way as it protected Nalini Chidambaram.
The Senior Counsel further pointed out the various statutory relaxations made in criminal law to benefit women, particularly under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002.
Additional Solicitor General (ASG) S.V. Raju, representing ED, had contended that the summons could not be deferred sine die. However, he assured the court that ED would defer the questioning for 10 days till the next date of hearing.
The ASG gave the assurance on the same day when the BRS leader was summoned by ED for questioning on allegations of influencing the Delhi liquor policy 2021-22 through illegal gratification.
The Apex Court did not record the ASG’s statement today, much like the previous time, stating that there was no reason to doubt the law officer’s oral assurance made at the Bar.