K'taka Guv writes to CM, advises personal probe into BJP MLC CT Ravi's 'police atrocity' claims
Bengaluru, Jan 8: Karnataka Governor Thaawarchand Gehlot has written to Chief Minister Siddaramaiah advising him to personally look into BJP MLC C T Ravi's complaint alleging "police atrocity" in Belagavi, after the legislature session last month, and take necessary action.
The Governor in his letter to CM dated December 31, refers to Ravi along with his colleagues meeting him and submitting a detailed representation regarding the incident that happened after the end of the session in Belagavi.
Ravi had allegedly used a derogatory word against Minister Laxmi Hebbalkar in the Legislative Council on December 19 during an altercation between them, when the House was adjourned for a while.
He was arrested on the same day evening and taken into the police van from the premises of Suvarna Vidhana Soudha in Belagavi, where the legislature session was held, based on Hebbalkar's complaint.
Ravi had on December 20 accused the police of "violating" human rights, as he alleged that they took him on rounds the entire night to various places, without providing proper food and rest, after his arrest on the previous evening.
The High Court had subsequently ordered the immediate release of Ravi in its interim order, observing that police failed to follow the procedures in arresting him. However, the bench of Justice M G Uma asked the BJP leader to cooperate with the investigation and be available for questioning.
The Governor in his letter to CM said, "Ravi has informed that the Commissioner of Police, Belagavi and Superintendent of Police, Belagavi with their subordinate officers have kidnapped him and carried him to dangerous remote locations like sugar cane field, open field, Khanapur, Kittur, Lokapur, Sankeshwar and various places of the district over the distance of 400 km throughout the night and also injured him to bleed in custody, terribly tortured and harassed mentally and physically which is unpardonable police atrocity."
Ravi has also informed that the complaint filed by him against the assault and atrocity at Khanapur Police Station and appeal in this regard to SP Belagavi have not been attended by the Police, the Governor said. "Therefore, he has requested me to take legal action against the erred police officers in the entire episode and also requested for additional security for his life."
"On perusal of the representation and documents, both the issues seem very serious and need your personal intervention. Therefore, I have forwarded the said representation along with this letter. Since the matter relates to the elected representative, I advise you to look into the matter personally and take necessary action," Gehlot added.
In the wake of allegations against police for ill-treating Ravi in custody, the Belagavi police had last month clarified that the BJP leader was shifted to various places for security reasons and to avoid disrupting public order.
The Criminal Investigation Department is probing into a case in which Ravi is accused of using a derogatory word against Minister Hebbalkar in the Legislative Council, and also a case in which unknown persons have been accused of allegedly attempting to attack Ravi in the Suvarna Vidhana Soudha on December 19.
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.
SC orders release of prisoner after 25 years, recognises him as a minor at time of offence
New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Wednesday (January 8) ordered the release of a prisoner who had been incarcerated for nearly 25 years after determining he was a juvenile at the time of the offence in 1994.
A bench comprising Justice MM Sundresh and Justice Aravind Kumar found that the appellant, Om Prakash, was only 14 years old when the offence occurred.
Om Prakash, initially sentenced to death for murder, had raised the plea of juvenility during the sentencing stage. However, the trial court dismissed his claim, citing his statement under s. 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and the fact that he held a bank account. The High Court upheld this judgment, and the Supreme Court dismissed his appeal, affirming the death sentence.
Later, Om Prakash filed a curative petition before the Supreme Court, presenting a school certificate indicating his minor status at the time of the offence. The State of Uttarakhand also certified his age as 14 years at the time. Despite this, the curative petition was dismissed.
In 2012, his mercy petition to the President resulted in the commutation of his death sentence to life imprisonment, with a condition that he would remain incarcerated until he turned 60. Subsequently, an ossification test confirmed his age as 14 at the time of the crime. He also obtained information under the RTI Act showing that minors could open bank accounts. In 2019, he challenged the Presidential order in the High Court of Uttarakhand, which dismissed his plea, citing the limited scope of judicial review over Presidential orders. He then appealed this judgment in the Supreme Court.
During the proceedings, the Supreme Court sought updated instructions from the State regarding its earlier admission in the curative petition about his juvenility. The State reaffirmed that he was a minor at the time of the offence.
The Court observed that injustice had been inflicted at every stage due to the failure of the judiciary to address the appellant's juvenility plea. Justice Sundresh, authoring the judgment, stated that the reliance on Om Prakash's statement under s. 313 of CrPC was erroneous, particularly when the statement itself suggested he was only 14 years old at the time of the crime.
The Court criticised the High Court for ignoring s. 9(2) of the Juvenile Justice Act 2015, which permits juvenility claims to be raised at any stage. It also noted that the appellant had suffered prolonged incarceration due to judicial errors, depriving him of the opportunity to reintegrate into society.
Ordering his immediate release, the Court clarified that its judgment was not a review of the 2012 Presidential order but the application of the 2015 Act to a deserving individual. It directed the Uttarakhand State Legal Services Authority to facilitate his rehabilitation and reintegration, including access to welfare schemes for livelihood, shelter, and sustenance under Article 21 of the Constitution. The State was also instructed to assist him in availing these schemes.
Senior Advocate Dr S. Muralidhar represented the appellant, with legal assistance provided by Project 39A of National Law University Delhi. ASG KM Nataraj appeared for the State.
