Gauri Lankesh murder case: SIT has no proof against K T Naveen Kumar, counsel tells court

The hearing of the bail petition filed by K T Naveen Kumar, an accused in the journalist Gauri Lankesh murder case, has been adjourned till Thursday.

Published: 27th June 2018 05:09 AM  |   Last Updated: 27th June 2018 05:09 AM   |  A+A-

Gauri Lankesh (Photo | PTI)

By Express News Service

BENGALURU: The hearing of the bail petition filed by K T Naveen Kumar, an accused in the journalist Gauri Lankesh murder case, has been adjourned till Thursday. When the plea came up for hearing before the 70th City Civil & Sessions Court on Tuesday, Kumar’s counsel A Vedamurthy submitted that the SIT does not have material or digital evidence against his client.

“There are several discrepancies in the charge sheet filed by the SIT. The person, who claims to have sold bullets to Naveen Kumar, has made a statement that bullets were sold were Rs 3,000. But, according to the statement of the witness present during the actual transaction, it was Rs 20,000.

Also, though the court had instructed the SIT to take an advocate with Naveen for narco analysis, we were not informed in time. By the time the advocate reached Gujarat, where Naveen was taken for the tests, the SIT team was ready to leave with Naveen, saying he refused to undergo the test. Further, the SIT has not furnished the documents related to pay Rs 1.10 lakh to the Forensic Science Laboratory towards the tests,” he said, adding that even the Call Details Record of the mobile number furnished by the SIT does not belong to his client.

The magistrate asked why the matter was not brought to the notice of the court when it happened and asked the counsel whether the accused was ready to undergo the tests now. The advocate told the court that he will discuss it with Naveen and then inform the court.

The judge also asked whether the bullets purchased by Naveen and the bullets used in the murder of Gauri Lankesh matched according to ballistic reports. The advocate replied that they are not matching. Then, the judge asked the Public Prosecutor (PP) to submit his arguments but the PP sought two days’ time. Following his request, the judge adjourned the hearing till Thursday.


Disclaimer : We respect your thoughts and views! But we need to be judicious while moderating your comments. All the comments will be moderated by the editorial. Abstain from posting comments that are obscene, defamatory or inflammatory, and do not indulge in personal attacks. Try to avoid outside hyperlinks inside the comment. Help us delete comments that do not follow these guidelines.

The views expressed in comments published on are those of the comment writers alone. They do not represent the views or opinions of or its staff, nor do they represent the views or opinions of The New Indian Express Group, or any entity of, or affiliated with, The New Indian Express Group. reserves the right to take any or all comments down at any time.

flipboard facebook twitter whatsapp