The argument started when the President of Karnataka Missions Network Walter Maben deposed before the Commission. Advocates Nova Bethany, B Ibrahim and Francis, who appeared for the Christians, pleaded before the Commission that the copies of Satyadarshini should be given to them before proceeding to the cross examination. They argued that it is not possible to cross the witness without reading the content of the controversial book.
Meanwhile, Advocate for the Police Srinivas pleaded that the copies of the book should not be made public.
Reddy apprehended that if the copies of the book was made public, it may lead to further circulation and later it may trigger communal violence.
Justice B K Somasekhara clarified that since ‘Satyadarshini’ has been marked as an evidence in connection with the allegations levelled by Bajrang Dal former Leader Mahendra Kumar against Christians in the proceedings, the book is a public document.
Further, he said that anybody can obtain a public document from the court under RTI. Hence, an order in this regard will be passed on Wednesday, he added.
Meanwhile, a copy of the book was given to Walter Maben in the morning. But later, deposing before the Commission, Mabel said that it is not possible to read and understand all the contents of the book within a short duration.
3 CDs submitted
Walter Maben submitted three CDs’, which he claimed as the vital evidence in connection with the Church attacks and other related incidents, before the Commission.
According to sources, a CD consists video clipping of former Bajrang Dal Leader Mahendra Kumar’s statements, owning the responsibility of church attacks.
Meanwhile, remaining CDs consists of damage of vehicles by the police and other evidences related to church attacks.
Other witnesses Rita D Almeida from Kulshekhar, Reginald of Kursugudde, Shambur Church Committee Vice President P Andrew Lobo and Kulur Pastor Samraj deposed before the Commission.
Advocate Jagadish Shenava appeared for Bajrang Dal, while Advocates Narayan Reddy, Siddagangaiah and Prasanna Deshpande argued in favour of the government.
