Bengaluru: Karnataka Chief Minister B S Yediyurappa on Tuesday inaugurated a flyover in the city after freedom fighter and Hindutva ideologue Veer Savarkar, despite opposition from the Congress and JD(S) to name it after him.

The 400 metre long flyover, constructed at a cost of Rs 34 core by city civic body Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike, is on the Major Sandeep Unnikrishnan Road at Yelahanka.

Speaking after inaugurating the flyover, Yediyurappa said Savarkar sacrificed his entire life for the freedom of India.

It was apt to name the flyover after Savarkar, a "great patriot", the Chief Minister said, as he noted that his government was giving priority for the all round development of all cities in the state, including Bengaluru.

The flyover was earlier scheduled to be inaugurated on May 28 on Savarkar's birthday. However, the government had postponed it at the last minute, citing COVID-19 related restrictions in place. Both Congress and JD(S) flayed the move to name the flyover after Savarkar.

Alleging that the BJP government in Karnataka did not show any interest regarding the Sangolli Rayanna (18th century warrior and freedom fighter) statue in Belagavi district until there was a public movement for it, the state Congress in a tweet said, "It was shameful and an act of treason to name the flyover at Yelahanka after Savarkar, who was accused of being involved in Gandhi's killing."

JD(S) too, pointing at issues that had cropped up against installing the Sangolli Rayanna statue at Belagavi, said that in such a situation, it was against the move to name a public flyover after Savarkar, who does not have any connection with Karnataka.

Accusing the BJP government of adopting an "anti-state policy" from the day it came to power, JD(S) said the move to name the flyover after Savarkar too was an extended part of this policy and demanded to know why it had not got it named after any esteemed personality in the state.

JD(S) youth wing had planned a protest against the naming of the flyover, but were not given permission by police and its leaders were detained.

Earlier in May too, Congress and JD(S) had opposed the move and termed it as an 'insult' to freedom fighters of the state.

 

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.



Sultanpur (UP) (PTI): An application for obtaining a voice sample of Rahul Gandhi was filed in an MP-MLA court here on Saturday during a hearing in a defamation case against the Congress leader over his alleged objectionable remarks against then BJP president Amit Shah in 2018.

The plaintiff Vijay Mishra's advocate, Santosh Kumar Pandey, said he filed the application requesting that a voice sample of Gandhi be collected and sent to a forensic science laboratory for comparison with a CD that has already been submitted to the court.

Rahul Gandhi's lawyers registered their objections to this demand. The next hearing in the matter is fixed for April 6, Pandey said.

On February 20, Gandhi, the Lok Sabha MP from Raebareli, had appeared before the court and recorded his statement, claiming the case was filed against him due to political vendetta.

He had also told the court that the audio and video evidence submitted by the complainant was incorrect and said he would present his own evidence.

In December 2023, the court issued a warrant against Gandhi after he failed to appear before it. He later surrendered before the court in February 2024 and was granted bail on two surety bonds of Rs 25,000 each.

The hearing was deferred on Friday due to a holiday on Ram Navami.

Pandey said that during the previous hearing, the complainant's side had filed an application seeking verification of audio and video evidence of the alleged statements made by Gandhi by matching them with his original voice.

The case stems from Gandhi's alleged objectionable remarks against Shah during the 2018 Karnataka election campaign. Following the remarks, Vijay Mishra, a resident of Hanumanganj under Kotwali Dehat police station area in Sultanpur, filed the defamation complaint.