Cops resort to baton charge as protesters attempt to lay siege to Reddy’s house

Bengaluru, Sep 28: The Special Investigation Team (SIT) probing charges against arrested Karnataka BJP MLA N. Munirathna Naidu, including allegations of rape, honey-trapping, and other offences, on Saturday conducted raids at his residence and 15 other locations across the city.

Sources confirmed that the raids were taking place at his Vyalikaval residence and other properties owned by the BJP MLA. The operation is being conducted by the SIT under the Criminal Investigation Department (CID) led by ACP Kavitha.

The team is examining documents, electronic devices, and other materials related to the rape and honey-trapping case. The SIT is being supported by experts from the Forensic Science Laboratory (FSL), with Superintendent of Police (SP) Sowmya Latha also participating in the search and inspection at Munirathna’s Vyalikaval residence.

According to sources, the raids were triggered by information provided by the victim, who alleged that Munirathna recorded footage of sexual assaults and used it to blackmail politicians and public servants, including IAS and IPS officers.

The victim reportedly revealed that she was used to entrap the woman who had lodged a rape case against a senior IFS officer. She was allegedly instructed to frame the rape victim in a drug peddling case.

The complainant told police that she was tasked with capturing compromising videos of the rape victim who had filed the case against the IFS officer. She claimed that, after several failed attempts to obtain the videos, the victim was drugged with sleeping pills, and obscene footage was recorded without her consent. Later, the IFS officer was bailed out from the charges.

Furthermore, the complainant has accused MLA Munirathna of raping her at his office within the state legislature, in his official vehicle, and at his godown. She has alleged that he recorded videos of these assaults.

Police sources also revealed that the victim in the MLA's case provided details of a plot involving sending HIV-infected women to Munirathna's targets in an attempt to ruin them politically and personally. She also disclosed the names of several politicians whom she had entrapped through honey-trapping.

The woman further claimed that Munirathna had threatened to have her son kidnapped and killed if she refused to comply with his demands. According to her, the MLA had a well-organised team dedicated to carrying out these honey-trapping operations, and she provided details about his close associates and relatives involved in the scheme.

Munirathna, who was in judicial custody following his arrest in the rape and honey-trap case, has now been taken into the custody of the SIT.

The MLA was transferred from Bengaluru Central Jail to the CID office on the night of September 24. The BJP legislator, however, has denied all the allegations, claiming they are false.

Karnataka Congress leader D.K. Suresh had alleged that Munirathna was trying to infect his adversaries with HIV and that the government should investigate the matter.

Karnataka Health Minister Dinesh Gundu Rao reminded that V D Savarkar was not against cow slaughter as he himself was non-veg eater, PTI reported on Thursday.

"As a Brahmin he was eating meat, and he was openly propagating eating meat," said the minister at an event in Bengaluru.

Reacting to Gundu Rao's claim, BJP MP Anurag Thakur called Congress a "factory of lies" as he warned that India won't tolerate any disrespect towards Savarkar.

"By disrespecting Veer Savarkar they have shown that they don't respect freedom fighters. During the Congress government, Sardar Bhagat Singh was termed a separatist in textbooks...By making those who want to break the nation join the congress party, Rahul Gandhi is taking forward the ideology of 'tukde tukde' and he is a 'modern Jinnah' who speaks ill of the country abroad...," he said.

Meanwhile, a court in Maharashtra's Nashik district summoned Congress MP Rahul Gandhi earlier this week in a defamation case filed against him for his alleged objectionable remarks against the Hindutva ideologue.

The complainant, who is the director of an NGO, claimed he watched a press conference addressed by Gandhi in Hingoli and also a speech made by the Congress leader in November 2022.

He alleged that Gandhi, on the two occasions, by his words and visual representations knowingly harmed the reputation of Veer Savarkar and also tried to defame the latter's image in the society.

According to the complainant, Gandhi said "Savarkar is BJP and RSS jin" which was defamatory in nature.

New Delhi: The Supreme Court today sought a report from the Karnataka High Court over controversial remarks made by Justice Vedavyasachar Srishananda during a recent court hearing.

Justice Srishananda, while addressing a landlord-tenant dispute, referred to a Muslim-majority area in Bengaluru as "Pakistan" and made a misogynistic comment involving a woman lawyer. 

A five-judge bench led by Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, along with Justices S Khanna, B R Gavai, S Kant, and H Roy, expressed the need for establishing clear guidelines for constitutional court judges regarding their remarks in court. 

The Supreme Court bench said that when social media plays an active role in monitoring and amplifying courtroom proceedings, there is an urgency to ensure judicial commentary aligns with the decorum expected from courts of law.

"Our attention has been drawn to some comments made by Karnataka High Court judge Justice V Srishananda during the conduct of judicial proceedings. We have asked the AG and SG to assist us. We ask the registrar general of the High Court to submit a report to this court after seeking administrative directions from the Chief Justice of Karnataka High Court. This exercise may be carried out in 2 weeks," the top court directed.

Videos of Justice Srishanananda have gone viral on social media.

In one video, he refers to a Muslim-dominated locality in Bengaluru as "Pakistan" and on another video he was seen making objectionable comments against a woman lawyer. In the second incident, Justice Srishanananda can be heard telling the woman lawyer that she seemed to know a lot about the "opposition party", so much so that she might be able to reveal the colour of their undergarments.