Mumbai police questioning owner of motorcycle used in firing outside actor Salman Khan's house
Mumbai (PTI): The police are questioning the owner of the motorcycle allegedly used by unidentified persons in the firing outside Bollywood superstar Salman Khan's house in suburban Bandra here, an official said on Monday.
The motorcycle, which was abandoned near Mount Mary Church, a little over a kilometre from the actor's house, was registered in the name of a man living in the Panvel area of Navi Mumbai, the official said.
The man had recently sold the two-wheeler to someone else, assistant commissioner of police Panvel Ashok Rajput said.
Two persons fired four rounds outside Bandra's Galaxy Apartments, where the actor resides, around 5 am and fled from the spot.
A probe revealed that the abandoned two-wheeler was registered in the name of a person residing in Panvel, and a team from the crime branch went there and brought the vehicle owner and two others for questioning, the official said.
According to officials, the suspects abandoned the vehicle near the church, walked some distance and took an autorickshaw to Bandra railway station.
They boarded a train going towards Borivali but alighted at Santacruz railway station and walked out, they said.
The police are questioning several other persons and recording their statements, he said, adding that the CCTV footage from the area is also being examined.
The police have formed more than a dozen teams to probe the incident, and some have been sent to Bihar, Rajasthan and Delhi, the official said.
"So far, we have not arrested or detained anybody in the case, but our inquiry is going on with several people," he said.
The police have registered a first information report (FIR) against an “unidentified person” under section 307 (attempt to murder) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and the Arms Act.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
K’taka HC declines stay on menstrual leave order, says issue of public importance
Bengaluru: The State Government has strongly defended its decision to grant one day of paid menstrual leave every month to women employees, telling the Karnataka High Court that the notification was issued in the larger interest of women and is legally sound. The Court, treating the matter as one of significant public importance, refused to stay the implementation of the order and adjourned the hearing to January 20.
The Labour Department’s November 20, 2025 notification was challenged by the Bangalore Hotels Association, Avirat Defence System, Facile Aerospace Technologies Ltd and Samos Technologies Ltd. Justice Jyoti Mulimani heard the petitions on Wednesday.
At the start of the hearing, the bench asked whether the State had filed its objections. Advocate General K. Shashikiran Shetty informed the Court that objections had been submitted and that copies would be provided to the petitioners.
Defending the notification, the Advocate General said the government had introduced a progressive measure aimed at women’s welfare, one that no other state in India had implemented so far. He told the Court that 72 objections were received and considered before finalising the notification. He argued that the government was empowered to frame such policy under Article 42 of the Constitution and noted that the Supreme Court and the Law Commission had earlier made recommendations in this direction.
ALSO READ: MP Brijesh Chowta urges centre to grant point of call status to Mangaluru airport
When the Court asked whether the notification applied to all sectors, the Advocate General replied in the affirmative. The bench observed that the matter required detailed hearing because of its wider public impact and decided to take it up in January. The Court added that petitioners may file their responses to the State’s objections before the next hearing.
Petitioners’ counsel B.K. Prashanth requested that the State be restrained from enforcing the order until the case is decided. The Advocate General responded that the government had already begun implementing the notification across all sectors.
Justice Mulimani noted that nothing would change between now and the next hearing and emphasised that the Court would consider all arguments thoroughly before issuing any direction. The bench then adjourned the matter to January 20 and asked petitioners to file any additional applications with copies to the State’s counsel.
