Udaipur beheading: NIA takes two accused into custody from Ajmer high-security jail
The anti-terror agency says there is a role of a bigger gang behind the brutal killing and that it was not just an act done by only two persons, who were arrested by state police after the incident.
Umesh Kolhe (54) was murdered in Amravati on June 21 allegedly for circulating a WhatsApp post supporting the controversial comments made by BJP’s Nupur Sharma against Prophet Mohammed.
“MHA has handed over the investigation of the case relating to the barbaric killing of Shri Umesh Kolhe in Amravati Maharashtra on 21st June to NIA,” HMO India tweeted.
The Kotwali city police in Amravati arrested a 44-year-old veterinarian in connection with the June 21 murder of Umesh Kolhe (54) who was killed allegedly for circulating a WhatsApp post supporting the controversial comments made by BJP’s Nupur Sharma against Prophet Mohammed.
The sixth accused in the case, Yusuf Khan Bahadur Khan (44), a doctor who runs a clinic in the city, was arrested on Friday night.
Confirming the link between Sharma’s comments and Kolhe’s murder, Deputy Commissioner of Police (Amravati city) Vikram Sali on Saturday said, “The motive behind the murder is for seeking revenge for the post made by him (Kolhe) in support of Nupur Sharma.”
 |
| Kolhe was killed on June 21 |
##
In November last year, President Ram Nath Kovind called upon judges “to exercise utmost discretion in what they say in courtrooms”. Speaking at the valedictory session of the Constitution Day celebrations, organised by the Supreme Court in 2021, the President said: “In Indian tradition, judges are imagined as a model of rectitude and detachment more akin to sthitpragya (steady wisdom)…
A petition has been filed before the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court amid growing public outrage against the remarks of judges against former BJP spokesperson Nupur Sharma.
Earlier today, a vacation bench of the apex court severely criticised former BJP spokesperson Nupur Sharma and blamed her for the Islamic terrorist attack which took place in Udaipur in which an innocent Hindu tailor was beheaded.
The petition filed by a social activist Ajay Gautam sought the withdrawal of the judges’ controversial remarks against Nupur Sharma. In a letter petition to CJI NV Ramana, Gau Mahasabha leader Ajay Gautam requested for orders to withdraw the oral remarks made by the Bench of Justice Surya Kant and Justice J. B. Pardiwala.
The petition also claimed that Nupur Sharma will be denied a fair trial after the oral observations of the Judges. The petitioner stated that the observations made by the Court are unwanted, uncalled for, without any merit and liable to be withdrawn. “Whether without trial or appeal or any judgment or finding of any court can this court made such statements which effect merit of the case as well as trial?,” Ajay asked the CJI in the petition.
This has not happened for first time with the Indian judiciary : SC makes strong oral observations against Nupur Sharma, even blames her for Udaipur murder
"I am truly disgusted and enraged. What a deracinated system we have in place, throwing a woman to the wolves." - Nupur Sharma tweeted today, July 1, 2022
"If we blame Nupur and say the comments she made led to beheading, then perhaps we'll have to blame the Wright brothers for 9/11 ... Nupur was wrong, no grey areas there, but that doesn't justify taking somebody's life". - Tehseen Poonawala, Congress supporter
A petition has been filed before the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court amid growing public outrage against the remarks of judges against former BJP spokesperson Nupur Sharma. Earlier today, a vacation bench of the apex court severely criticised former BJP spokesperson Nupur Sharma and blamed her for the Islamic terrorist attack which took place in Udaipur in which an innocent Hindu tailor was beheaded.
The petition filed by a social activist Ajay Gautam sought the withdrawal of the judges’ controversial remarks against Nupur Sharma. In a letter petition to CJI NV Ramana, Gau Mahasabha leader Ajay Gautam requested for orders to withdraw the oral remarks made by the Bench of Justice Surya Kant and Justice J. B. Pardiwala.
The petition also claimed that Nupur Sharma will be denied a fair trial after the oral observations of the Judges. The petitioner stated that the observations made by the Court are unwanted, uncalled for, without any merit and liable to be withdrawn. “Whether without trial or appeal or any judgment or finding of any court can this court made such statements which effect merit of the case as well as trial?,” Ajay asked the CJI in the petition.
"Biggest asset justice system in the face of the citizens of the country is impartial justice. And that has been shaken today. Comments made by the judges show that they already made their minds before hearing the people," - Mohandas Pai
The bug debate is : The specific reference to the Prophet’s age and the age of his third wife !!
- it has not been denied by Islamic scholars. She could have and should have avoided comments is one thing, but to say she ignited clashes and tension everywhere and even the gruesome Udaipur killing is taking things too far, OMG, My Lordships
New Delhi
Nupur Sharma's counsel also said in the court "Kindly see, before anchor, the debator on the other side makes statements. Within the same community, there are serious debates on this issue. It is not (age debate) something taken out of box".
This has not happened with the Indian judiciary for the first time nor it can be stated that this is for the last time.
The final order of the Supreme Court only says that Nupur Sharma has been permitted to withdraw the writ petition, and oral comments of judges against her are not included in it. But the damage - if to be taken cognizance of - has been done and things have gone viral.
Perhaps to the surprise of many, while rejecting the petition of former BJP spokesperson Nupur Sharma to club a large number of cases filed against her across the country and transfer them to Delhi, the Supreme Court made scathing and rather personal comments against her.
Justice Surya Kant has gone to blame Ms Nupur squarely for the violence unleashed by Islamists across Indianand the gruesome and merciless beheading of Kanhaiya Lal Teli in Udaipur.
The apex court said : “We saw the debate on how she was incited. But they way she said all this and later says she was a lawyer with ten year standing? It is shameful. She should apologise to the whole country".
“The way she (Nupur Sharma) has ignited emotions across the country. This lady is single-handedly responsible for what is happening in the country,” the bench went on to say.
“The petition smacks of her arrogance, that the Magistrates of the country are too small for her. If you are a spokesperson of a party, it is not a license to say things like this,” said the bench.
The apex court also said that she thinks she has back up power and make any statement without respect to the law of the land.
The bench also said that controversial remarks made by Sharma were either for “cheap publicity, political agenda or for some nefarious activities”.
It also asked about what the Delhi police have done after a complaint registered against Nupur Sharma.
The bench said on her complaint a person is arrested, but despite multiple FIRs she has not yet been touched by Delhi police.
When Sharma’s lawyer told the top court that she is joining the investigation and not running away, the bench remarked, “Don’t make us open our mouth.”
“There must have been red carpet for you. A red carpet,” the bench said. When senior advocate Singh argued that it is settled law that there cannot be multiple FIRs for the same offence and cited the judgment of the Supreme Court in Arnab Goswami case.
The bench said, “The freedom of a journalist cannot be equated to that of a political spokesperson who is making statements on television and ignites emotions across the country.”
One of the judges, J B Padriwala, who also remarked against Nupur Shama, according to observers is likely tobe Chief Justice of India by May 2028.
The honourable justice has earlier made strong observations against reservations (quota demands)in the country and had remarked - “If I am asked by anyone to name two things, which has destroyed this country or rather, has not allowed the country, to progress in the right direction, then the same is – Reservation and Corruption". .
But in the wake of the controversy, Justice Pardiwala later expunged the comments and called them superfluous.
Likewise even today's oral observations against Nupur Sharma were not part of the written orders.
The court order said - "learned senior counsel for the petitioner seeks and is permitted to withdrawthe present writ petition" for transferring all cases in the country to Delhi.
No comments:
Post a Comment