After Blood Money Rejection, Nimisha Priya Still Has 5 Possible Ways To Avoid Execution
India is offering Nimisha Priya free legal aid, consular access, and visa support, while sending experts to Yemen and applying diplomatic pressure via Iran and Gulf allies
In a major setback for Indian nurse Nimisha Priya, the family of Yemeni murder victim Talal Abdo Mahdi has refused to accept blood money, demanding the death penalty instead.
Nimisha Priya's case dates back to 2017 and has since progressed through the local court and Yemen's Supreme Court, both of which upheld her death sentence. Originally scheduled to be hanged on July 16, the execution was postponed, and the next hearing is set for August 14. Efforts to secure blood money compensation continue, but with limited alternatives available, the situation remains dire.
What Are Nimisha Priya's Options?
Under Yemeni Sharia law, one prominent way to avert the death penalty is through blood money. However, with the victim's family's refusal, Nimisha Priya is now exploring other options:
What The Indian Government Is Doing
The Indian Ministry of External Affairs and the Indian Embassy are providing Nimisha Priya with legal assistance, visa support, and consular visits at no cost. A team, including legal experts and Sharia scholars, is being sent to Yemen. Additionally, diplomatic pressure is being applied through friendly countries in Iran and the Gulf.
How Much Influence Does India Have On The Houthis?
The Indian government's influence on the Houthi rebels is limited and indirect, but certain strategic and diplomatic channels still offer scope for dialogue or pressure. The Houthis, a Shia Zaydi rebel group, control large parts of northern and western Yemen and function as the de facto government in those areas. They are widely believed to be backed by Iran.
Can Iran Help?
Given Iran's strong influence over the Houthi rebels, it's possible that India could leverage its cordial ties with Tehran to open a diplomatic channel and seek a resolution. However, it remains uncertain whether Iran views this as a priority issue and would be willing to intervene on India's behalf.
view comments
Disclaimer: Comments reflect users' views, not News18's. Please keep discussions respectful and constructive. Abusive, defamatory, or illegal comments will be removed. News18 may disable any comment at its discretion. By posting, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Deccan Herald
9 minutes ago
- Deccan Herald
Muslim bodies urge govt to ensure end of 'Israeli aggression' in Gaza
In a joint statement, prominent Muslim organisations and Islamic scholars called on both the Indian government and global powers to intervene and stop the 'continuing atrocities' in Gaza.
The Hindu
9 minutes ago
- The Hindu
Kerala High Court upholds ban on single-use plastic items
The Kerala High Court has upheld the orders that the State government had issued in 2019 imposing a ban on the manufacture, storage, transport, and sale of single-use plastic items in the State from January 1, 2020. A Bench of Justice Viju Abraham upheld the orders while dismissing petitions filed by Kerala Plastic Manufacturers' Association challenging them. The banned plastic items included plastic carry bags of varying thickness, plastic sheets, single-use utensils like cups, plates, dishes, spoons, forks, straws, and bowls, PET bottles less than 300 ml, flags, and non-woven bags. The petitioners questioned the State government's competence to issue the orders without corresponding Central rules. The State contended that the orders were issued under the Environment Protection Act, a power that the Supreme Court had upheld. On the petitioners' challenging fines imposed on them for illegal manufacture and storage of single-use plastic, the High Court said, 'It is for the petitioners to work out their remedy in appropriate proceedings.' The court further added that the government was duty-bound to implement the directions in government orders as well as rules framed by the Centre.
The Hindu
39 minutes ago
- The Hindu
Look at your own country: Bombay High Court raps CPI(M) over Gaza protest petition
The Bombay High Court on Friday (July 25, 2025) dismissed a petition filed by the Communist Party of India (Marxist) and the CPI challenging the Mumbai Police's decision to deny permission for a protest at Azad Maidan against the ongoing conflict in Gaza. The court observed that the Indian political organisations should prioritise domestic issues over international conflicts. A Division Bench comprising Justices Ravindra Ghuge and Gautam Ankhad pulled up the petitioners for focusing on matters outside the country and said, 'Our country has enough issues to deal with. We do not want anything like this. I am sorry to say that you are short-sighted. You are looking at Gaza and Palestine while neglecting what's happening here. Why don't you do something for your own country? Look at your own country. Be patriots. People say they are patriots, but this is not patriotism. Show patriotism for the citizens of our own country first,' the Bench remarked sharply during the hearing. Senior advocate Mihir Desai representing CPI(M), informed the Bench that on June 13, 2025, his clients submitted an application seeking permission from the Azad Maidan police station to hold a peaceful protest and gathering in Azad Maidan to show solidarity with the people of Gaza, who are currently in the midst of a genocide, by calling for a ceasefire. On June 17, denying permission to the All India Peace and Solidarity Foundation (AIPSF) that police informed them that the permission to protest was being denied in exercise of their powers under Section 168 of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) and Section 68 of the Maharashtra Police Act, 1951. Mr. Desai informed the Bench that the political parties have time and again taken up several causes that has concerned India and have been conducting health and education camps. The Court noted that the CPI(M), being a registered as Indian political party, should ideally be engaging with local civic concerns. 'You are a registered party in India. Your party could have taken up issues like garbage dumping, pollution, drainage, or flooding. Why are you not protesting on these issues? We are only giving examples. Instead, you want to protest over something happening thousands of miles away and showing concern for Palestine and Gaza,' the Bench observed. The petitioners stated that the Indian government's stance and support of Palestine as a State, has been an integral part of the nation's foreign policy. In 1974, India became the first Non-Arab State to recognize Palestine Liberation Organisation as the sole and legitimate representative of the Palestinian people. In 1988, India was also one of the first countries to recognize Palestine as a State. In April 2024, India voted in favour of the Human Rights Council Resolution on the Right of the Palestinian people to self-determination. Moreover, India is a State signatory to the Genocide Convention, 1948, and the protest which was held to condemn violence and genocide in Gaza, can in no way termed to be the foreign policy of the India State. Mr. Desai further argued that citizens have a fundamental right to protest at designated places and that disagreements with the government's foreign policy cannot be grounds to stifle dissent. He also contended that mere apprehensions of law-and-order issues, without concrete evidence, should not override constitutional freedoms. He also clarified that the protest has nothing to do with Operation Sindoor or India's border relations with neighbouring countries. CPI(M) issues statement Rejecting the petition, the court observed, 'You don't know the dust it could kick up. Whether to take a side for Palestine or Israel is their (Govt of India) work, why do you want to create such a situation that the country has to take sides on this? Why do you want to do this? It's obvious, going by the party you represent, that you don't understand what this could do to the foreign affairs of the country.' The CPI(M) has strongly condemned the Bombay High Court's remarks while dismissing its petition challenging the denial of permission to protest against the Gaza conflict. Calling the Court's comments unconstitutional and politically biased, the CPI(M) criticised the bench for questioning its patriotism and aligning with the Central government's foreign policy stance. 'It is regrettable to say that the Bench appears to be completely unaware of the constitutional provisions that empower political parties or the history of our country and the support and brotherly feelings of the Indian people towards the Palestinian people for their right to a homeland. The statement made by the High Court bench regarding the CPI(M) smacks of the bench aligning itself with the position of the Central Government,' the party said in a statement. The party invoked India's historical support for Palestine and urged citizens to reject what it termed a troubling judicial trend undermining democratic rights. 'We appeal to the freedom and democracy-loving people of the country to stand shoulder to shoulder with us in unequivocally rejecting this objectionable view,' the statement read.
