'Change of plans': Kavitha writes a critical letter to ED, refuses to appear in person

Hyderabad: Telangana Chief Minister K Chandrashekhar Rao's daughter and BRS MLC K Kavitha will not appear before the Enforcement Directorate in New Delhi today. Her legal team has submitted documents as sought by the investigating agency.

Ms. Rao writes a scathing letter to the Enforcement Directorate, citing that she has reason to be that the enquiry/investigation being carried out may not have the sanctity of law, and my expectation of a free, fair, or impartial inquiry or investigation has been severely impaired.

Read Full Letter here:

In response to your earlier summons issued on March 9th, I vividly brought to your kind notice that I being a woman and protected by the postulates of law, may not be called to the office of the Directorate and that I was always willing and ready to appear through audio/video mode and had also invited the officers at my residence which is as per the mandate of law. However, your office denied my request.

Your office said – "It is not possible to consider your request of an adjournment or recording of the statement at your residence since the confrontation with the person in ED custody is required to be done physically/in person."

On account of the aforesaid stand taken by you, despite elucidating the clear position of law in detail and depth, I have appeared before your good office on March 11, 2023

The proceedings on March 11th would leave a manner of doubt that I have rendered all due assistance and cooperation within my reach and knowledge. I had furnished all relevant information and answered all queries to the best of my knowledge, ability, and understanding. However, in a manner alien to the settled tenets of law, your good self chose to impound my phone despite there being no directive in the summons that I should bring the phone. Nothing was brought on record as to how my phone was connected with the alleged offence if any.

You (ED) have purportedly chosen to exercise powers under 50(5) of the PML Act, which I am legally advised to say is completely untenable in law, apart from the phone contents being covered under the law of right to privacy.

Further, I was made to sit in your good office even after sunset until around 8:30 PM, when I was finally allowed to leave and was handed over the subject summons for on March 16. A bare glance at the summons issued by your good self for March 16th, I have not been asked to appear "in person or through an authorised representative."

Since your good self has not chosen to exercise the discretion for calling me "in person", I am thus appearing through an authorised representative. Accordingly, I am authorising Soma Bharat Kumar-General Secretary of Bharath Rashtra Samithi, to appear on my behalf today to handover this representation and the documents annexed hereunto.

Be that as it may, I have absolutely no hesitation in joining the investigation and rendering cooperation with any inquiry/investigation as I have done in the past. The most shocking part in the entire proceedings that occurred on 11.3.2023 in your office is that despite your categorical assertion that my personal/ physical appearance was required for the purpose of confrontation with some arrested accused, no such confrontation took place. When specifically asked about the confrontation which was the specific purpose cited by your good self to call me personally on 11.03.2023, I was candidly told by the officer Ms.Bhanupriya Meena concerned, that they had "change of plans".

I, therefore, have reasons to believe and a grave apprehension that the enquiry/investigation being carried out may not have the sanctity of law and my expectation of a free, fair, or impartial inquiry or investigation has been severely impaired.

Owing to such compelling circumstances where my fundamental rights have been blatantly infringed and the right to avail constitutional remedies itself being a fundamental right, I have chosen to knock at the doors of the Honourable Supreme Court of India by preferring petition under Article 32 of the Constitution which is itself concomitant of Part III of the Constitution.