![]() Online edition of India's National Newspaper Thursday, Jan 18, 2007 ePaper |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Karnataka |
|
News:
ePaper |
Front Page |
National |
Tamil Nadu |
Andhra Pradesh |
Karnataka |
Kerala |
New Delhi |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Miscellaneous |
Engagements |
Advts: Classifieds | Jobs | Obituary |
Karnataka
-
Bangalore
Staff Reporter
BANGALORE: A habeas corpus petition before the Karnataka High Court seeking a direction to the police to produce K.S. Venkatesh and Rukmini, who were both allegedly picked up by the Bangalore police after Prof. Venkatesh filed a private complaint in a local court against Sri Vishvesha Tirtha of the Pejawar Math took a new turn on Wednesday when the State alleged that Prof. Venkatesh was involved in several cases of cheating. State Public Prosecutor S. Dore Raju, appearing for the State, made these submissions when the petition by Srinidhi, nephew of Prof. Venkatesh, seeking production of the two detainees came up for hearing. In his petition, Srinidhi alleged that the Kempe Gowda Nagar police had picked up Prof. Venkatesh and his sister, Rukmini, after Prof. Venkatesh filed a private complaint before the First Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (ACMM), Bangalore, against Sri Vishvesha Tirtha and six others for allegedly detaining him, assaulting and threatening to kill him. He said that the ACMM had directed the Kempe Gowda Nagar police to investigate the complaint. In his private complaint, Prof. Venkatesh had said that he was detained and assaulted after his friend had failed to repay a loan of Rs. 12 lakh that he (friend) had taken from Sri Vishvesha Tirtha. Assistant Commissioner of Police, Chamarajpet sub-division, G.T. Nayak, was asked to investigate and file before February 23 a report before the court. Srinidhi alleged that the police had tortured Prof. Venkatesh and Ms. Rukmini and when he went to visit them in the police station, they were badly injured. He alleged that the police had released them soon after he filed the petition. When the matter came up in the morning, a Division Bench, comprising Justice H.L. Dattu and Justice Anand Byrareddy, directed the Special Public Prosecutor to ensure that records pertaining to the case were produced before them and adjourned the case to the afternoon. When the Bench was perusing the records, Mr. Dore Raju submitted that Mr. Nayak had wanted to inquire from them the details of the case and that he had only followed the order of the ACMM when he had asked them to come to the police station. He said the police had let the two off after completing their inquiries. He urged the court to take note of the affidavit filed by the police. The Bench then directed the police to produce Prof. Venkatesh and Ms. Rukmini on the next date of hearing and adjourned the case.
Printer friendly
page
News:
ePaper |
Front Page |
National |
Tamil Nadu |
Andhra Pradesh |
Karnataka |
Kerala |
New Delhi |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Miscellaneous |
Engagements |
|
|
|
The Hindu Group: Home | About Us | Copyright | Archives | Contacts | Subscription Group Sites: The Hindu | The Hindu ePaper | Business Line | Business Line ePaper | Sportstar | Frontline | Publications | eBooks | Images | Home |
Copyright © 2007, The
Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the contents of
this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of
The Hindu
|