Prajwal Revanna’s driver and BJP leader trade charges over leaked videos
Bengaluru (PTI): Prajwal Revanna’s former car driver Karthik and BJP leader G Devaraje Gowda accused each other of leaking the alleged sleaze videos of the JD(S) Hassan MP which has caused a big embarrassment to the regional party.
Prajwal is the grandson of former Prime Minister H D Deve Gowda and nephew of former Chief Minister H D Kumaraswamy. JD(S) suspended him today over the row.
The Karnataka government constituted a three-member Special Investigation Team (SIT) of IPS officers led by Additional Director General of Police B K Singh to probe the alleged sexual harassment of many women by Prajwal, who is said to be in Germany currently.
An FIR has already been registered against Prajwal as well as his father Revanna at the Holenarasipura police station in Hassan district for allegedly sexually harassing their former cook.
In a video message on social media, the driver said that he worked with Prajwal Revanna for the last 15 years but it has been a year since he has not been with him.
“The reason (for distancing from Prajwal) was that my land was taken away and my wife was beaten up. I was mentally tortured. Because my land was taken away, I came out of the job and started my fight (to get back land),” Karthik said in the message.
He said he had approached G Devaraje Gowda for justice as had been fighting against the Deve Gowda family.
Devaraje Gowda had fought the 2023 assembly election from Holenarasipura assembly constituency on the BJP ticket and lost to Revanna.
In the meantime, Prajwal Revanna had brought a stay order to prevent me from releasing any sleaze photos or videos, Karthik said.
“Devaraje Gowda told me to hand over the photos and videos which he promised to hand over to the judge to help vacate the stay. Trusting him, I gave him a copy, which he used,” the driver claimed.
“Other than Devaraje Gowda, I did not give this video to Congress leaders or anyone else. I did not give the videos and photos to Congress leaders because they were quite close to Prajwal. Hence, I approached Devaraje Gowda, but he too cheated me,” Karthik alleged.
Since the BJP and the JD(S) have forged an alliance, Karthik said Devaraje Gowda had written to his party high command not to give ticket to Prajwal pointing to his conduct.
Rejecting the charges, Devaraje Gowda told reporters here in Bengaluru that Karthik had been hanging around with the Congress Lok Sabha candidate from Hassan constituency Shreyas Patel.
He said that neither the JD(S) nor the BJP would release the videos as it would go against the NDA alliance's candidate.
“If there was someone benefiting from this, it was Congress. Only for his political gain, the Congress candidate (Shreyas Patel) has mortgaged the modesty of women seen in the videos,” Devaraje Gowda said.
He said he is waiting for the SIT to serve him a notice where he will release important documents. The BJP leader said the Congress leaders will fall in the ditch they had dug for others.
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.
CCTVs in police stations: SC asks amicus to convene meeting on utilisation of funds
New Delhi (PTI): The Supreme Court on Tuesday said that a meeting be convened on May 6 to deliberate on the aspect of utilisation of funds by the states on installation of CCTVs in police stations across the country.
A bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta asked senior advocate Siddhartha Dave, who is assisting it as an amicus curiae in a suo motu matter concerning lack of functional CCTVs in police stations, to hold a meeting on May 6 with the Centre, all states and Union Territories.
"We are of the view that a meeting be convened by the amicus, as done earlier, in which the home secretary of the central government or his nominee not below the rank of joint or additional secretary and the home secretary of states/Union Territories will participate," the bench said.
The issue cropped up after the amicus flagged the aspect of utilisation of funds by the states.
Dave told the bench that in UTs, the Centre gives 100 percent funds while in hilly states, the central government gives 90 percent funding.
He said in remaining states, the Centre gives 60 percent while the rest 40 percent funding is by the respective state.
"Why don't we get responses of the states only on utilisation of funds?" the bench said.
The top court suggested that the amicus can convene a meeting with the Centre, states and UTs on the issue.
It posted the matter for hearing on May 13 and said that a report be submitted before it.
On April 7, the Centre told the top court that all issues concerning installation of CCTVs in police stations would be sorted out within two weeks.
Attorney General R Venkataramani had told the bench that he was taking stock of the issue and a lot of things were happening.
On February 26, the apex court directed the Centre and others to participate in a meeting to deliberate upon the feasibility, modalities and implementation framework of the issues, including creation of a centralised dashboard and standardisation of CCTV infrastructure in police stations.
The top court had earlier directed registration of a suo motu case over the lack of functional CCTVs in police stations after taking cognisance of a media report.
The apex court had in 2018 ordered the installation of CCTV cameras across police stations to check human rights abuses.
In December 2020, the top court directed the Centre to install CCTV cameras and recording equipment at the offices of investigating agencies, including the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), the Enforcement Directorate (ED) and the National Investigation Agency (NIA).
It said that states and UTs should ensure that CCTV cameras were installed at every police station, at all entry and exit points, main gate, lock-ups, corridors, lobby and reception, as well as in areas outside the lock-up rooms so that no part was left uncovered.
The top court said that CCTV systems must be equipped with night vision and have audio as well as video footage.
The court made it mandatory for the Centre, states and the UTs to purchase such systems which allow storage of data for at least one year.
