Bharat Rashtra Samiti (BRS) leader K. Kavitha has been released from jail after five months. She got bail from the Supreme Court on Tuesday. Kavitha was arrested on March 15 this year in a money laundering case related to the alleged liquor scam in Delhi.
While granting him bail, the bench of Justice BR Gavai and Justice KV Vishwanathan also reprimanded the Delhi High Court.
On July 1, the Delhi High Court refused to grant bail to Kavita. Justice Swarn Kanta Sharma’s bench had said that Kavita is an educated and politically capable woman and she cannot be considered weak. Therefore, she cannot be granted bail under the provision of Section 45 of PMLA, which provides for granting bail to a woman. Earlier, the trial court had also not granted bail to Kavita on the same grounds.
Expressing objection to this order of Delhi High Court, the Supreme Court made a strict comment and said, ‘If this order of the High Court is made a law, then no educated woman will be able to get bail.’
What is the women factor in money laundering law?
Section 45(1) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) provides for bail to the accused. Section 45(1) has two conditions for bail.
The first condition is that the court should feel that the accused has not committed any crime and if he is released on bail, he will not commit any crime. The second condition is that the public prosecutor will be given an opportunity to oppose the bail application.
However, there is a special provision in this section. Section 45(1) provides that if an accused is below 16 years of age or is a woman or is ill or infirm or is accused of money laundering of less than Rs 1 crore, then he can be exempted from these two conditions. In such cases, the Special Court can order the release of the accused on bail.
This means that a person below 16 years of age, a woman, a physically or mentally unfit person is not required to fulfil these two conditions for bail.
Also read: …then ED cannot arrest in money laundering, read- what will be the effect of this decision of Supreme Court
So did she get bail because she is a woman?
On July 1, the Delhi High Court rejected Kavita’s bail plea, saying that since she was an educated and politically capable woman, she could not be given the benefit of the special provision of Section 45(1).
On the order of the High Court, the bench of Justice Gavai and Justice Vishwanathan said, ‘In many cases, it is argued that the accused is an MLA, MP, minister or Chief Minister, so he should not be given special treatment and should be treated like other accused. But in the present case, the High Court believes that she (Kavita) cannot be compared to a weak woman. The High Court believes that the special provision of Section 45 applies only to weak women.’
The Supreme Court orally remarked, ‘If this order of the Delhi High Court is made a law, it will mean that no educated woman can get bail. At least this will be applicable in the courts of Delhi. What is this? Instead we should say that there should be no difference between an MP and a common citizen, but here (the High Court) discretion was not used.’
However, this comment of the Supreme Court does not mean that Kavita has been granted bail only because she is a woman. The Supreme Court clarified that the courts should use their discretion while granting bail under the special provision of Section 45(1).
The Supreme Court said that courts should be more sensitive towards women accused in money laundering cases. However, the court also warned that the courts will use their full discretion while deciding such cases. Just because a woman is educated, an MP or MLA, she cannot be deprived of the benefit of the special provision of Section 45(1).
Also read: Anyone can be arrested without a warrant, it is not even necessary to give a copy of the report… How did ED become so powerful?
Can women get bail?
In December last year, the Supreme Court gave an important decision by rejecting the bail plea of Saumya Chaurasia. Saumya Chaurasia was the deputy secretary of former Chhattisgarh CM Bhupesh Baghel and was arrested in a money laundering case.
While giving the verdict in this case, the bench of Justice Aniruddha Bose and Justice Bela Trivedi had said that the courts are not bound to grant bail only because the accused is a woman.
The bench had said that Section 45(1) is not mandatory and hence, the court should exercise its discretion while invoking it and granting bail on the ground of being a woman.
The Supreme Court had said, ‘Courts need to be more sensitive and sympathetic towards younger persons and women, as they are more likely to be vulnerable. Some people use them and make them scapegoats in such crimes. However, the courts should keep in mind that nowadays more educated and well-established women are involved in commercial activities, due to which they also get involved in illegal activities knowingly or unknowingly. Therefore, while using the special provision of Section 45 (1), the courts should consider the evidence and other factors.’
In the Saumya Chourasia case, the Supreme Court had said that there was sufficient evidence of her involvement in money laundering and hence she could not be granted bail under the special provision of Section 45(1) merely on the basis of her being a woman.
Also read: What does ED do with the ‘mountain of notes’ seized during raids? Know under what circumstances the seized money becomes the property of the central government
What are the charges against Kavita in the liquor scam?
K. Kavitha is the daughter of former Telangana CM KCR and a member of the Legislative Council. She was arrested by the ED on March 15. After this, the CBI also arrested her on April 11. She has got bail in both the cases from the Supreme Court.
ED alleges that Kavita was associated with the ‘South Group’ lobby of liquor traders. The South Group had a big and important role in the Delhi government’s 2021-22 excise policy.
It is alleged that Vijay Nair, an accused in the liquor scam, had allegedly received a bribe of at least Rs 100 crore from the ‘South Group’. The South Group had given this bribe to him to give to the leaders of the Aam Aadmi Party.
In December 2022, the ED had claimed in the remand paper of accused Amit Arora that a bribe of Rs 100 crore was given by the ‘South Group’ to Vijay Nair and others for the Aam Aadmi Party leaders.
After this, in March last year, ED also arrested Arun Ramachandran Pillai. Pillai had told during interrogation that there was an agreement between Kavitha and Aam Aadmi Party. Under this, a transaction of Rs 100 crore took place, due to which Kavitha’s company ‘Indospirits’ got entry in the liquor business of Delhi.
However, Kavita is the third big leader to be released on bail in the alleged liquor scam. Earlier, Aam Aadmi Party leaders Manish Sisodia and Sanjay Singh were released on bail by the Supreme Court.
Source (PTI) (NDTV) (HINDUSTANTIMES)