Congress MP Rajeev Satav, 46, succumbs to Cytomegalovirus, days after recovering from covid

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.

New Delhi: The Supreme Court today closed proceedings against Karnataka High Court Judge Justice Vedavyasachar Srishananda, following his public apology for controversial comments made during court sessions. Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, leading a five-judge bench, stated that the decision was made in the interest of justice and the dignity of the judiciary.

Justice 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. His comments, which went viral on social media, prompted the Supreme Court to seek a report from the Karnataka High Court, which was submitted shortly after the incident.

"No one can call any part of territory of India as 'Pakistan'," Chief Justice Chandrachud said. "It is fundamentally against the territorial integrity of the nation. The answer to sunlight is more sunlight and not to suppress what happens in court. The answer is not to close it down."

The Supreme Court had taken up the case on its own and had sought a report from the Karnataka High Court over the controversial remarks. A five-judge bench led by CJI Chandrachud, along with Justices S Khanna, B R Gavai, S Kant, and H Roy, had on September 20 expressed the need for establishing clear guidelines for constitutional court judges regarding their remarks in court. 

"Casual observational may indicate personal biases especially when perceived to be directed at a certain gender or community. Thus one must be wary of making patriarchal or misogynistic comments. We express our serious concern about observations on a certain gender or a community and such observations are liable to be construed in a negative light. We hope and trust that the responsibilities entrusted to all stakeholders are discharged without bias and caution," CJI Chandrachud said today. 

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.

Videos of Justice Srishanananda were viral on social media.

In one video, he refers to a Muslim-dominated locality in Bengaluru as "Pakistan" and in 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.

New Delhi: Downloading and watching child pornography is an offence under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, the Supreme Court ruled today in a landmark judgment on the stringent law to prevent child abuse.

The bench of Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud and Justice JB Pardiwala set aside the Madras High Court order that had ruled that merely downloading and watching child pornography was not an offence under the POCSO Act. The Supreme Court noted that the high court had committed an "egregious error" in passing the judgment.

The Madras High Court's order had come in a case in which a 28-year-old man was charged with downloading child pornography on his phone. The court had quashed the criminal proceedings against the man and said children these days are grappling with the serious issue of watching pornography and society must be mature enough to educate them instead of punishing them.

The Supreme Court today restored the criminal proceedings against the man.

At the outset, Justice Pardiwala thanked the Chief Justice for the opportunity to pen this judgment. The order focused on Section 15 of the POCSO Act which lays down punishment for the storage of pornographic material involving children.

"Any person who stores any pornographic material involving a child and fails to report or destroy it is punishable with a fine of not less than five thousand rupees., and repeat offence will be punishable with fine of not less than ten thousand rupees. If the material is stored for further transmitting or propagating, then along with fine, it is punishable with upto three years of imprisonment. For storing child pornographic material for commercial purpose is punishable with three to five years of imprisonment, and in subsequent conviction, upto seven years of imprisonment," the Section says.

Justice Pardiwala said that in this case, mens rea is to be gathered from actus rea -- mens rea refers to the intent behind the crime and actus rea is the actual criminal act.

"We have said on the lingering impact of child pornography on the victimisation and abuse of children... We have suggested to the Parliament to bring an amendment to POCSO... so that child pornography can be referred to as child sexually abusive and exploitative material. We have suggested an ordinance can be brought in. We have asked all courts not to refer to child pornography in any order," the bench said.

The Chief Justice called it a "landmark judgment" and thanked Justice Pardiwala.