Third arrest in Noida dowry murder case; Brother-in-law held
Noida, Aug 25 (PTI) The brother-in-law of Nikki, the 26-year-old woman who was allegedly set ablaze for dowry in Greater Noida, has been arrested, police said on Monday.
The accused, identified as Rohit (28), was arrested by Kasna Police near Sirsa Toll Chauraha following a tip-off and manual intelligence inputs, the police said in a statement.
A case had been registered against him at Kasna Police Station on August 22 under sections 103(1) (murder), 115(2) (voluntarily causing hurt), and 61(2) (attempting to commit offences punishable with life imprisonment or others) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
Police said Rohit had been absconding since the incident that sparked outrage across the region.
Nikki's husband Vipin, brother Rohit, mother and father are among those mentioned as accused in the FIR. Three of them have been arrested.
Nikki was allegedly beaten and then set on fire by her husband Vipin Bhati and in-laws at their home in Sirsa village, Greater Noida, on Thursday night.
Disturbing videos of the assault, recorded by Nikki's elder sister Kanchan, who is married into the same family, circulated widely on social media. One clip showed Nikki being dragged by her hair, while another showed her walking down the stairs in flames before collapsing.
Vipin Bhati was arrested on Saturday and later shot in the leg during an alleged attempt to escape police custody on Sunday. His mother, Daya (55), was also arrested the same day. Police said Vipin had snatched a sub-inspector's gun and fired at officers while being escorted to recover evidence, prompting police to retaliate.
The case has drawn widespread attention as Nikki's family alleged she faced years of torture and escalating dowry demands since her marriage in 2016. They said they had already given a Scorpio SUV, a motorcycle, and gold jewellery to her in-laws, but the demands later increased to Rs 36 lakh in cash and even a luxury car.
Her elder sister Kanchan, who is married in the same family and witnessed the incident, told reporters that Nikki was assaulted in front of her young son.
She also told police that Nikki was allegedly doused with a flammable liquid and set on fire. Nikki succumbed to her injuries while being taken to a hospital in Delhi, according to police.
The victim's father Bhikahri Singh had said his daughters Kanchan and Nikki were married to brothers Rohit Bhati and Vipin Bhati, respectively, in 2016. "Since then they have been torturing both the daughters and demanded dowry," he had alleged.
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.
Supreme Court declines fresh curbs on hate speech, says existing laws are enough
New Delhi: The Supreme Court of India on Wednesday refused to issue additional directions to curb hate speech across the country, holding that the existing legal framework is sufficient and that the real issue lies in implementation rather than absence of law.
A Bench comprising Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Sandeep Mehta said creation of criminal offences falls within the legislative domain and courts cannot legislate or compel Parliament and state legislatures to enact laws.
The Bench observed that constitutional courts can interpret the law and issue directions for enforcement of fundamental rights, but cannot step into the law-making role.
“At the highest, the court may draw attention to the need for reform. The decision whether and in what manner to legislate remains within the exclusive domain of Parliament and the state legislatures,” the court said.
The court held that the field of hate speech is not legally vacant and said concerns arise mainly from poor enforcement of existing provisions.
It also noted that the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, provides a comprehensive mechanism to set criminal law in motion, meaning there is no legislative vacuum.
Referring to remedies already available under the earlier Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) and the BNSS, the court said police are duty-bound to register an FIR when a cognisable offence is disclosed, as laid down in the Lalita Kumari judgment.
It said if police fail to register an FIR, an aggrieved person can approach the Superintendent of Police under Section 154(3) of CrPC or Section 173(4) of BNSS, and thereafter move the magistrate under Section 156(3) CrPC or Section 175 BNSS, or file a private complaint under Section 200 CrPC or Section 223 BNSS.
The Bench further held that an order directing investigation under Section 156(3) CrPC does not amount to taking cognisance under Section 190 CrPC or the corresponding Section 210 of BNSS.
Even while declining fresh directions, the court acknowledged the seriousness of the issue.
It observed that hate speech and rumour-mongering directly affect fraternity, dignity and constitutional order.
The Bench urged legislative authorities to consider whether further policy or legal measures are needed in view of changing social challenges, including suggestions made in the 267th Report of the Law Commission in 2017.
The judgment came in a batch of petitions arising from events dating back to 2020, when multiple pleas were filed over alleged communal narratives spread through television channels and social media.
Among the earliest cases were challenges relating to content described as the “Corona Jihad” campaign and a programme aired by Sudarshan TV titled “UPSC Jihad”. During those proceedings, the court had restrained further telecast of the programme.
Later, more petitions were filed over speeches made at religious gatherings described as “Dharam Sansad” events.
These included pleas moved by journalist Qurban Ali and Major General S.G. Vombatkere seeking action against alleged hate speeches made at such forums.
During the pendency of the matter, the Supreme Court in 2023 had issued major directions asking all states and Union Territories to act proactively in cases involving communal hate speeches or remarks hurting religious sentiments.
It had directed police to register FIRs suo motu, without waiting for formal complaints.
Later, contempt petitions were also filed alleging poor implementation of those earlier directions.
