Mumbai police search Tapi river to recover pistol used for firing outside Salman Khan's home
Surat (PTI): A Mumbai crime branch team on Monday launched a search in the Tapi river in Gujarat's Surat city to recover the pistol used by two men for allegedly firing outside Bollywood superstar Salman Khan's residence, police said.
The two arrested men - Vicky Gupta (24) and Sagar Pal (21) - told the police during interrogation that they threw the weapon into the Tapi river here from a railway bridge when they were fleeing towards Bhuj in a train after arriving in Surat by road from Mumbai following the firing incident, according to sources.
The duo allegedly fired outside 58-year-old Khan's house at the Galaxy Apartment in Bandra area of Mumbai on April 14 and then fled the spot on a motorbike.
Based on the technical surveillance, they were apprehended on April 16 from a temple premises at Mata No Madh near Bhuj town in Gujarat by joint teams of the Mumbai and Kutch police.
They were subsequently handed over to the Mumbai police for further investigation.
"A team of Mumbai police has come to Surat to recover the gun used by two men for firing at Salman Khan's residence there. Our teams are assisting the Mumbai police in recovering the weapon," Surat Police Commissioner Anupam Singh Gehlot told PTI.
Senior police inspector Daya Nayak, known as 'encounter specialist', was also with the Mumbai crime branch team which was searching for the weapon in the Tapi river water here with the help of local divers and fishermen, another official said.
As per the investigation, Gupta and Pal had reached Surat by road after firing at Khan's house in Mumbai on April 14.
They then boarded a Bhuj-bound train from Surat railway station. They disposed of the pistol in the Tapi river when the train was passing from a bridge in the city.
Prima facie, the duo's main objective behind firing outside Khan's residence was to create "terror", police had said.
The Mumbai police have declared jailed gangster Lawrence Bishnoi and his younger brother Anmol Bishnoi as "wanted accused" in connection with the incident.
Gupta and Pal were allegedly receiving instructions from the two Bishnoi brothers, the Mumbai police have said.
While Lawrence Bishnoi is lodged in the Sabarmati central prison in Gujarat in another case, his brother is believed to be in Canada or the US, an official earlier said.
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.
