Mohammed Nalapad Haris, son of MLA N.A. Haris, was ‘the first one to assault’ victim, Vidvat L., as per the video footage, the Karnataka High Court observed on Monday.
Justice Sreenivas Harish Kumar made this observation when Senior Counsel C.V. Nagesh, arguing Nalapad's bail petition, claimed that there was no ‘overt act’ as alleged against the MLA's son in the three key records — the complaint, the statement of the complainant, and the statement of Vidvat's father.
Meanwhile, the court reserved its order on the bail plea saying that the order would be given on March 14.
Mr. Nagesh claimed that the incident of assault was ‘neither pre-planned nor the accused carried any weapon or lethal weapon’ to the pub, and only bottles and ice bucket or jug was used in the ‘drunken brawl’ due to ‘a trivial quarrel’.
Relationships
Alleging ‘hidden hands acting’ in the case registered against the MLA's son, Mr. Nagesh termed as ‘uncharitable allegation’ the Special Public Prosecutor's statement that Dr. Anand, who issued discharge summary of the victim, was a kin of a close political associate of the MLA.
Is the Investigating Officer not a relative of BJP MLA R. Ashok, who met the victim's father and later addressed the media outside Mallya hospital, Mr. Nagesh questioned.
A Director General of Police (DPG) had visited the hospital and gave a statement to the media that the victim's father is his friend and then went to the police station and ensures that attempt to murder charge is invoked against the MLA’s son, Mr. Nagesh claimed quoting media reports.
On the Special Public Prosecutor's allegation that the MLA illegally accessed the discharge summary of the victim, Mr. Nagesh claimed that a television channel had shown the discharge summary a day before the MLA had put it on his social media account while stating that the MLA had ‘not stolen’ from the hospital.
‘Mystery’
However, as Mr. Nagesh did not disclose the source from where the MLA got the discharge summary, Special Public Prosecutor M.S. Shyam Sundar said that the question on how the MLA got the confidential discharge summary still remains a mystery. Dr. Anand was not ‘authorised’ to issue a discharge summary as only the chief medical officer could have issued it as it is a medico-legal case, the Special Public Prosecutor claimed.
