Key Witness in Gauri Lankesh Murder Case Receives Threats, Complains to Special Court
Menu
हिंदी తెలుగు اردو
Home Politics Economy World Security Law Science Society Culture Editor's Pick Opinion
Support independent journalism. Donate Now
Law
Key Witness in Gauri Lankesh Murder Case Receives Threats, Complains to Special Court
The Wire Staff
48 minutes ago
The witness who has been threatened was crucial in identifying the accused and the place where the alleged conspiracy was hatched to murder Lankesh.
Gauri Lankesh was shot at her home in September 2017. Photo: PTI
Real journalism holds power accountable
Since 2015, The Wire has done just that.
But we can continue only with your support.
Contribute now
New Delhi: An important witness in the case pertaining to the murder of journalist-activist Gauri Lankesh has complained to the special court about receiving threats from people who told him not to identify the accused.
The witness, a resident of Belagavi received the threats over a phone call on May 28 and submitted a written complaint on the same day, reported Deccan Herald.
'The witness received a phone call where he was threatened not to identify the accused. He filed a complaint before the court. Though he was disturbed and upset, he testified before the court on Thursday,' a source told the newspaper.
A copy of the complaint and a memo by the special public prosecutor were submitted to the court.
The witness who has been threatened was crucial in identifying the accused and the place where the alleged conspiracy was hatched to murder Lankesh.
Well-known journalist and editor Lankesh, a household name for readers in Karnataka because of her sharp writing and bold views, was shot dead at her residence in Bengaluru late on September 5, 2017.
She was editor of the weekly Lankesh Patrike – a magazine that has been described as an 'anti-establishment' publication – and had come under attack for her views against the communal politics of the Sangh parivar in Karnataka.
The chargesheet in her murder case had said that the assassination was an 'organised crime' carried out by people associated with the Sanatan Sanstha, an extremist right-wing Hindutva organisation.
Make a contribution to Independent Journalism
Related News
Petition in Madhya Pradesh HC Over Communal Coverage of Rape Case in Bhopal
When the Supreme Court Echoes Populist Sentiments, It Risks Undermining the Constitution's Voice
UP Deputy CM Backs Hindu Rashtra Call at Right-Wing Event in Lucknow
US Jury Orders NSO Group to Pay $168 Million in WhatsApp Spyware Case
Supreme Court Raps MP Govt for Shielding Police in Custodial Death of Pardhi Youth
Agra Muslim Man Murder: Cops Shoot, Arrest Two, Person who Linked Event to Pahalgam Attack Also Held
Supreme Court Flags ED's 'Pattern of Allegations Without Any Evidence'
After 19-Month Freeze, Modi Signals Thaw with Canada Following Carney's Win
Trump's Anti-Bribery Freeze Offers Adani Hope, But No Guarantee of Reprieve, Say US Legal Experts
View in Desktop Mode
About Us
Contact Us
Support Us
© Copyright. All Rights Reserved.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
23 minutes ago
- Time of India
Commissioner of examinations can make changes to the caste and religion entries of students in SSLC book, rules Kerala high court
Kochi: High court has held that the commissioner of examinations has the authority to make changes to the caste and religion entries of students in their SSLC books under Rule 3(1), Chapter VI of the Kerala Education Rules (KER), 1959. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now Justice D K Singh issued the ruling while allowing a petition filed by Sudhin Krishna C S of Palakkad, who sought a directive to the concerned authorities to change his name and religion in his SSLC book. The petitioner, born to a Muslim father and a Hindu mother, was originally named Mohammed Riyazudeen C S. After attaining majority, he chose not to follow Islam and began practising the Hindu religion, having been raised by his mother in accordance with Hindu tenets. He subsequently applied to the district educational officer seeking changes to his name and religion in the SSLC book, supported by relevant documents, including a certificate from the Arya Samajam, Kozhikode. However, the authorities rejected his request, citing an absence of provisions under the KER, 1959, for altering religious identity in the SSLC book. This led the petitioner to approach the high court. The govt pleader opposed the plea, arguing that no authority had been notified under Rule 3(1), Chapter VI of the KER to effect changes in the caste or religion columns, and that the commissioner of examinations was only authorised to alter the date of birth. The court, however, underscored that the petitioner has a fundamental right to practise a religion of his choice. If a person changes their religion voluntarily and without coercion, fraud, or undue influence, such an act is protected under the Preamble to the Constitution and Article 25, the court noted. Upon examining Rule 3(1), Chapter VI of the KER — titled 'Alteration of Date of Birth etc.' — the court observed that the scope of the rule is not limited to date of birth alone; it also allows for other changes, including religion and caste, to be effected by a competent authority. Accordingly, the court directed the authorities to carry out the changes as requested by the petitioner with respect to his name and religion in the SSLC book.
Time of India
24 minutes ago
- Time of India
Stalin: Fear of litigation prompts Ravi to give assent to bills; still 14 bills pending
Chennai: Chief minister M K Stalin on Tuesday said governor R N Ravi could have given assent to the two bills that reserved seats in local bodies for people with disabilities (PwD) for fear of litigation. The governor's office is still sitting on 14 bills, including the Kalaignar University Bill, which proposes establishing a university named after former chief minister M Karunanidhi, sources told TOI. Asked for his response to the governor giving assent to bills passed by the assembly in its last sitting, Stalin told reporters here, "That was expected. Not a big issue. It was passed by the legislature and sent. Maybe he gave assent because he was afraid that we would go to court. Nothing else." The Supreme Court had on April 8, set a timeline for governors and the President to decide on bills. Sources told TOI that governor Ravi had since then given assent to eight bills, including four appropriation bills. Among the bills awaiting assent are the Tamil Nadu Fiscal Responsibility (Amendment) Bill and the Tamil Nadu Cooperative Societies (Amendment) Bill. These were passed by the legislature in Feb and Dec 2024, respectively. Other pending bills include one to protect economically weaker sections, especially farmers and women self-help groups, from coercive recovery of loans by microfinance institutions. A bill to amend the Goondas Act to punish dumping of biomedical waste in Tamil Nadu from neighbouring states is also pending. When asked about the pending bills in light of the Supreme Court's ruling on timelines, DMK MP P Wilson stated: "Anyone who has faith in the judicial system and believes in the Constitution and the rule of law must respect the Supreme Court's verdict, as it is final. If the governor chooses to defy the court's order, the law should take its own course. However, I want to know whether the Prime Minister is encouraging such defiance of the court's order. Can the President of India remain silent to such a contemptuous act? The governor should have been sacked when the Supreme Court indicted him for malafide actions."
United News of India
38 minutes ago
- United News of India
After 18 years, SC closes petitions on Human Rights Violations by Salwa Judum in Chhattisgarh
New Delhi, June 3 (UNI) Bringing closure to a long-running legal battle, the Supreme Court has disposed of all pending petitions filed by sociologist Nandini Sundar and others concerning alleged human rights violations committed by Salwa Judum activists and security forces in Chhattisgarh. These matters had remained before the apex court for nearly 18 years. The case traces back to the Chhattisgarh government's controversial deployment of local tribal youth as Special Police Officers (SPOs) to combat Maoist/Naxalite insurgency. The SPOs, often associated with groups like the 'Koya Commandos' and Salwa Judum, were accused of committing serious rights violations in the course of anti-insurgency operations. In a landmark 2011 ruling, the Supreme Court had directed the State of Chhattisgarh to disband and disarm all SPOs, noting grave concerns over state-sponsored vigilantism. Despite that judgment, two writ petitions and one contempt petition remained pending until recently. A bench comprising Justices B.V. Nagarathna and Satish Chandra Sharma disposed of the cases, holding that the writ petitions were closed on the ground that the reliefs sought had already been addressed through the 2011 judgment. The contempt petition, which challenged the Chhattisgarh Auxiliary Armed Police Force Act, 2011, was found to be outside the scope of contempt jurisdiction, as it effectively sought new writs in the guise of contempt, the court ruled. The bench clarified that the enactment of a law cannot be considered contempt of court merely because it follows a judicial order. 'The promulgation simpliciter of an enactment is only an expression of the legislative function and cannot be said to be an act in contempt of a Court unless it is first established that the statute so enacted is bad in law constitutionally or otherwise,' the Court held. Emphasising the separation of powers, the bench reiterated that any law passed by Parliament or a State legislature must be challenged solely on grounds of legislative competence or constitutional validity, not as contempt of court. The Court underlined, 'A legislature has the power to enact or amend a law, even to remove the basis of a judicial judgment, as long as it operates within the constitutional framework.' It also noted that Courts do not have the authority to treat the exercise of legislative power as contempt, simply for enacting or amending laws. Importantly, the bench observed that restoring peace and ensuring rehabilitation in Chhattisgarh remains the constitutional responsibility of both the State and the Union, citing Article 315 of the Constitution. 'It is the duty of the State of Chhattisgarh as well as the Union of India to take adequate steps for bringing about peace and rehabilitation to the residents of Chhattisgarh who have been affected by the violence from whatever quarter it may have arisen,' the Court said. UNI SNG RN
