The Delhi High Court on Friday was urged to initiate perjury proceedings against Nitish Katara murder convict Vikas Yadav for allegedly furnishing false information regarding the date of his recent marriage in order to secure bail benefits.
The plea was filed by Katara’s mother, Nilam Katara, who claimed that Yadav had actually married in July and not on September 5 as he had told the court. She alleged that he produced fabricated evidence to mislead the judiciary and wrongfully extend his interim bail.
Court’s Direction
Justice Ravinder Dudeja, before whom the matter came up, sought Yadav’s response to the allegations and directed the Delhi Police to verify the documents and photographs submitted by Nilam Katara. The court asked for a status report and listed the matter for further hearing on December 9.
Appearing for Nilam Katara, advocate Vrinda Bhandari contended that Yadav had “intentionally and deliberately” misled the court by providing false statements under oath. She pointed to two photographs purportedly showing that Yadav was married in July at The Aura banquet hall in Noida’s Sector 74.
However, Yadav’s counsel countered that the photographs in question were from his engagement ceremony, not his marriage, and argued that the Supreme Court had already been apprised of this fact.
Vikas Yadav, son of former Uttar Pradesh politician D. P. Yadav, is serving a 25-year sentence without remission for the kidnapping and murder of business executive Nitish Katara in 2002. His cousin Vishal Yadav is also serving a similar sentence.
The murder stemmed from the cousins’ opposition to Katara’s alleged relationship with Bharti Yadav, Vikas’s sister, citing caste differences.
Vikas Yadav was granted interim bail by the Supreme Court earlier this year to look after his ailing mother. Later, he sought an extension of this relief, citing his “recent marriage” as an additional ground. On September 9, however, the Delhi High Court dismissed his plea for extension of interim bail.
Nilam Katara’s application seeks action under Sections 227, 231, 234, and 235 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) for giving and fabricating false evidence, producing false certificates, and deliberately misleading the court. She asserted that Yadav’s conduct amounted to perjury intended to secure an “undue benefit of interim bail.”
The court’s decision on whether to proceed against Yadav for perjury will be taken after receiving Delhi Police’s verification report.
