Advocate Balan terms Prabhakar Bhat’s statement ‘an act of terrorism,’ seeks NIA probe
Says “there is a likelihood Bhat being sentenced 7-8 year in the case”
Bengaluru: Amid row surrounding RSS Leader Prabhakar Bhat’s statement on Muslim women, Senior Advocate, S.Balan termed Kalladka Prabhakar Bhat’s statement ‘an act of terrorism,’ and has called for an investigation by the National Investigation Agency (NIA). “As Bhat’s case falls under the IPC Section 153 A, 505 (2), it is a serious crime and an act of terrorism. The statement against Muslim women in an anti-social statement. This case should be investigated by the NIA,” said Balan sharing information about the case in conversation with Vartha Bharathi on Friday.
Kalladka Prabhakar Bhat's bail application hearing took place at the 3rd Additional District Sessions Court in Srirangapatna, Mandya district. Senior Advocate S. Balan argued on behalf of the complainant Najma Chikkaneele, urging the cancellation of the interim anticipatory bail granted to Bhat.
“The police have informed that the charge sheet is ready and will be submitted to the Magistrate Court. Later, Prabhakar Bhatt will have to run to the court. The inquiry will take place swiftly. If convicted, the charge carries a minimum jail term of three years.While, Rahul Gandhi was sentenced to two years for saying a word about Modi. There is a possibility of 7-8 years of punishment for Prabhakar Bhat’s statement," he added.
Commending swift investigation and preparation of charge sheet by the Police, he stated, “The trial is going on in the sessions court. The charge sheet has to be filed in the Magistrate Court. So the police have filed a report. It is a good development that there was a swift investigation and the charge sheet is ready.”
“Prabhakar Bhat is repeatedly committing such crimes. Therefore he is a habitual offender. It was brought to the court's attention that he should be investigated in police custody under the Karnataka Control of Organised Crimes Act (KCOCA).Responding to this, the Junior Lawyer for the accused sought permission *for extension* till January 10th, stating that the senior Lawyer was not present on that day, and that the accused will be called to the high court for hearing on January 9. This case has nothing to do with the case being heard in the High Court. This is a case of anticipatory bail. *It was brought to the attention of the court not to bring the entire High Court case to this*," said Balan.
"Judge who heard the arguments asked to come on January 10 at four o'clock in the evening, and stated that he will hear the argument. Although the Lawyer for the accused requested for the case to be brought up again, they were not given time. He said that he will give you a chance," he said.
"This is a serious case. What does it mean by new husbands everyday for Muslim women? Aren't Muslim women citizens of the country? As per 153A, 354(2)4 this is a heinous crime. The NIA should investigate this. The argument was presented before the court that it was an anti-social act," opined Balan.
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.
Sujit Nair raises concerns over speculation of DMK-AIADMK understanding to block TVK
Chennai: Journalist and political commentator Sujit Nair has expressed concern over speculation that the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam and the All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam could explore a post-poll understanding to prevent Vijay-led Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam from forming the government in Tamil Nadu.
In a social media post, Sujit Nair said the election verdict in Tamil Nadu reflected a clear public demand for political change and argued that the mandate should be respected irrespective of political preferences.
Referring to reports and political discussions surrounding a possible understanding between the DMK and AIADMK, he said he hoped such developments remained only speculative conversations and did not turn into reality.
Nair stated that if such an alliance were to take shape, it would raise serious questions about ideological politics in the country. He said TVK had emerged through a democratic electoral process and that the legitimacy to govern in a parliamentary democracy comes from the people’s verdict.
According to him, attempts to prevent an electoral winner from forming the government through unexpected political arrangements may be constitutionally valid, but many people could view them as politically opportunistic.
He further said that such a move could particularly affect the political image of the DMK, which has historically projected itself around ideology, social justice and opposition politics. Nair said that in ideological terms, the DMK appeared closer to TVK than to the AIADMK, and joining hands with its long-time political rival only to remain in power could weaken its broader political narrative.
He added that the same questions would apply to the AIADMK as well, as the party had spent decades positioning itself against the DMK and such an arrangement could create discomfort among its cadre and supporters.
Drawing a comparison with Maharashtra politics in 2019, Nair said he had expressed similar views when the Shiv Sena formed an alliance with the Indian National Congress and the Nationalist Congress Party after the Assembly elections.
He said post-poll alliances between long-standing political rivals often create a public perception that ideology and electoral mandates become secondary when political power equations come into play.
Nair also said such developments increase public cynicism towards politics and reinforce the belief among voters that ideology is often sidelined after elections.
He maintained that the Tamil Nadu verdict was emphatic and said respecting both the spirit and substance of the mandate was important for the credibility of democratic politics.
