A bench of Justices B R Gavai and K V Viswanathan said the trial was not going to conclude soon and undertrial custody should not become a punishment for an accused.
The bench also expressed strong disapproval of Delhi high court’s order rejecting Kavitha’s plea for bail as per Sec 45 of PMLA that makes a special case for bail for women, among other categories. The HC had said Kavitha being “highly educated and accomplished” could not be given benefit of the provision which was meant for a “vulnerable woman”. SC said courts could not create a subcategory when the provision only mentioned ‘woman’.
‘Be fair’: SC says 2 others not being tried
After half-an-hour of hearing and after examining some of the evidence, the bench raised objections over the probe and told additional solicitor general S V Raju that if he continued to argue the case on behalf of the agencies, then it would have to pass a detailed order and would have to pass observations on the merits of the evidence which could affect trial proceedings. Reluctantly, the ASG relented. He agreed for bail to Kavitha and asked the court not to pass any remarks on the merits of the case, paving the way for the court to pass a brief order granting bail. The bench also clarified in its order that its observations would have no bearing on the merits of the case.
Kavitha, daughter of former Telangana chief minister K Chandrashekar Rao, who was arrested by ED on March 15, is the third high profile accused after AAP leader Manish Sisodia and MP Sanjay Singh to come out of prison in the case. Delhi CM Arvind Kejriwal got bail in the PMLA case but his bail plea in the CBI case is pending in SC.
The bench invoked the same principle applied in Sisodia’s case that delay in trial and long incarceration could be grounds for bail in money laundering cases. The court noted that the probe against Kavitha in both cases was complete and chargesheet/complaint had been filed in court and no custodial interrogation was needed. It said trial in both cases were unlikely to be completed soon since there are about 493 witnesses and the documentary evidence runs to nearly 50,000 pages and it was a fit case for bail as an undertrial’s custody should not be turned into a punishment.
On the high court’s order denying bail on grounds of Kavitha being “highly educated and accomplished”, the bench said, “This court puts a caution that courts, while deciding such matters, should exercise discretion judiciously. The court does not say that merely because a woman is well-educated or sophisticated or a member of Parliament or member of Legislative Council is not entitled to the benefit of Section 45 of PMLA Act. We find that the learned single-judge bench totally misdirected itself,” the SC said.
The bench also questioned why Buchi Babu, the auditor who allegedly received Rs 25 crore on behalf of Kavitha, was not an accused in the money laundering case when ED accepted that he took money. The court also said the role of Magunta Reddy, a liquor businessman, was similar to Kavitha’s but he was not made an accused but a witness. Reddy’s son was made an accused but he was granted pardon and turned approver in the case.
“Prosecution has to be fair. A person who incriminates himself has been made a witness. Tomorrow, you pick up anyone as you please and leave anyone as you choose? You cannot pick and choose any accused. What is this fairness? Sorry to see this state of affairs. If he has a role, his role is almost equal to that of Kavitha. So you will pick and choose anyone?” the bench said.
Sensing the mood of the bench, CBI and ED decided not to press the case against Kavitha as any adverse observations by the SC on the merits of the case would affect the trial.
The bail plea of another accused in the case, Vijay Nair, also came up for hearing on Tuesday before a bench headed by Justice Hrishikesh Roy. It deferred the case for a week after CBI-ED sought time to respond to his petition.
#questions #fairness #CBI #probe #Kavitha #bail #India #News #Times #India
