ED files caveat in SC on Kavita’s demand for ‘I am a woman, so I will not go to ED office’

ED files caveat in SC: The Enforcement Directorate (ED) has filed a caveat in the Supreme Court against Bharatiya Rashtra Samiti’s (BRS) MLC Kavita’s petition. The MLC has challenged the summons issued against him by the investigating agency in the Delhi Excise Policy case. Explain that protest letter or caveat application is made to assure that no adverse order is passed against them without hearing the other party.

According to sources, Kavitha, daughter of Telangana Chief Minister K Chandrasekhar Rao, has approached the Supreme Court for questioning in the ED’s office. He has said that as per the norms, a woman cannot be called for questioning in the ED’s office. ED should do this inquiry at his residence. After which the Supreme Court has agreed to hear the petition challenging the summons of ED on 24 March.

Supreme Court will hear on March 24
The ED had earlier issued summons to the MLC on March 15 asking him to appear. After which she was asked to appear again on March 16, but she did not appear saying that her petition is pending in the Supreme Court. Kavita’s lawyer said that a woman is being called to the ED office for questioning, which is completely against the law. However, the decision of the Supreme Court is yet to come on this.

Kavita’s lawyer said that by mentioning this petition before CJI DY Chandrachud, an immediate hearing has been demanded. In which the court asked what was the reason for such haste in the case, then the lawyer replied that Kavita has been asked to appear before the ED tomorrow. After which the court has agreed to hear this petition on March 24.

No provision for recording statement at the residence of a person
Kavita’s lawyer Vandana Sehgal filed a petition on her behalf. In which he urged the Supreme Court to quash the ED summons issued for March 7 and 11. In this petition, it was said that asking Kavita to appear at the agency office instead of her residence is contrary to the principles of criminal jurisprudence. In the petition, it has been described as a violation of the provision of Section 160 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), 1973.

In this petition, it has been demanded that the entire process of interrogation by the ED, such as the recording of Kavita’s statements, should be under the surveillance of CCTV cameras. Along with this, audio or videography should also be done in the presence of his lawyer. Kavita was called for questioning by the ED in the money laundering case related to the Delhi Excise Policy case. After which he urged the ED that the inquiry should be done at his residence. Responding to which the investigating agency had issued a statement. In which it was said that there is no provision under PMLA to record statement at the residence of a person.

read this also- Delhi Cyber ​​Fraud: Gang busted in the name of giving huge returns in lieu of investment, deposited more than 40 crores in 10 days