Karnataka police urge state to file appeal in Mangaluru homestay attack case

In 2012, nearly 40 members of the Hindu Jagarana Vedike violently attacked young men and women celebrating birthday at a home stay. Though the incident was captured on video, recently on August 6, the Mangaluru Sessions Court had acquitted all the accused in the case.
Subhash Padil (left) who led the homestay attack in 2012 and Ganesh, another accused who was singled out by the then Chief Justice of the Karnataka High Court Vikramajit Sen as a key attacker.
Subhash Padil (left) who led the homestay attack in 2012 and Ganesh, another accused who was singled out by the then Chief Justice of the Karnataka High Court Vikramajit Sen as a key attacker.
Written by:
Published on

The Mangaluru City police have written to the state government urging that an appeal be filed in the verdict of the 2012 homestay attack case in which 39 persons belonging to the Hindu Jagarana Vedike were acquitted. Hindu Jagarana Vedike is a right-wing extremist outfit. 

A senior IPS officer told TNM that the police had written to the Home Department regarding filing an appeal. However, the Home Department has the discretion to reject the opinion of the police regarding the appeal. 

In July 2012, about 40 Hindutva goons from the Hindu Jagarana Vedike assaulted a group of 13 young men and women who were celebrating birthday at a homestay. Television journalist Naveen Soorinje, who was following a tip-off, bravely covered the attack, exposing the terror activities of the Hindutva thugs. The attack was led by Subhash Padil, who was one of the assailants in the Mangaluru pub attack in 2009. 

Twelve years later, on August 6, however, the 6th Additional District and Sessions Court, Mangaluru, acquitted 39 Hindutva activists accused in the assault. 

Read: Why 39 goons walked free in Mangaluru homestay case even though everyone knew they did it

The prosecution had built its case around two main witnesses — the complainant Vijay Kumar and one of the victims, Gurudutt Kamath — and argued that their testimonies alone were sufficient to convict the attackers. 

However, the judge dismissed their testimonies and that of the other victims on two main grounds — that there were discrepancies and that they could not specify exactly which attacker assaulted whom and in what manner. Another reason the judge cited for dismissing their testimonies is that a test identification parade was not conducted. 

Similarly, the judge also disregarded the forensic report which stated that the video footage was not tampered with, on technical grounds.

Related Stories

No stories found.
The News Minute
www.thenewsminute.com