Bengaluru: The Central Crime Branch (CCB) probing the assault on 24-year-old Vidwath Loganathan by the Shanthinagar MLA NA Haris’ son Mohammed Nalapad and his men, has finally recorded the victim’s statement on Saturday, 13 days after the incident.
While the CCB officials had recorded the statements of all the persons related to the incident, Vidwath’s statement was on hold because of his health.
The CCB team led by inspector Ashwath Gowda were at the Mallya Hospital on Saturday and spoke with Vidwath for over two hours. “Vidwath’s statement was no different from the complaint which was filed by his friend Praveen on February 18.
Vidwath too said that Nalapad and his friends beat him up mercilessly following a scuffle over his leg accidentally touching Nalapad,” a senior CCB officer said.
Asked if there was anything more than just a fight over touching leg, the officer said that they could not establish any old rivalry between the duo nor any other reason during the investigation.
Vidwath was brutally assaulted by Nalapad and his six men after a scuffle broke out between Nalapad and Vidwath when Vidwath's leg touched Nalapad at Farzi Cafe in UB City on the night of February 17.
Vidwath was beaten up black and blue by Nalapad and gang until he fell unconscious. His friend Praveen who had accompanied him to the cafe, rushed him to Mallya Hospital for treatment but there too, Nalapad and gang went and threatened Vidwath with dire consequences if he filed a complaint.
Meanwhile, all the seven accused in the assault case including Nalapad were remanded to judicial custody till March 7. The accused's' petition to get bail was rejected by the 63rd City Civil and Sessions Court on Friday on grounds that "there are chances of petitioner causing a threat to the prosecution witnesses and chance of his absconding and chance of him committing similar offences cannot be ruled out.
Considering the gravity and seriousness of the offences, reasonable apprehension of witnesses being tampered, this court is of the considered view that the petitioner is not entitled for bail."
However, the lawyers representing the accused have decided to challenge the orders in the High Court on Monday.
