By SAT News Desk
Sydney, 12 August 2021: Vishal Jood,24, who is facing criminal cases relating to the September 2020 and February 2021 incidents here, has been again refused bail by a court today. The court after a one-hour video conferencing hearing decided to continue with his ‘Bail refused status’ decided during the previous hearing and posted the case for 27 January 2022 for 10 charges and 31 January 2022 for 2 other charges.
An NSW police media release in July 2021 said, ” The Indian National has been charged with three counts of affray, three counts of armed with intent to commit an indictable offense, two counts of destroying or damage property – $ 5,000 & $15,000 (DV), and assault occasioning actual bodily harm in the company of other(s).”
The case is connected to incidents, the police media release said, on 16 September 2020 and 28 February 2021 in which there was an attack on a man and a group of people were attacked respectively. There was another incident on 14 February 2021, a man driving a Range Rover was attacked. The incidents have been probed by the Parramatta Police Area Command.
Vishal Jood who was living in Australia on an expired visa got support from Indian politicians including Haryana CM Manohar Lal Khattar who wrote a letter to Meenakshi Lekhi, India’s Minister of State in the Ministry of External Affairs and Ministry of Culture, to intervene in the case. Social media including Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube are full of posts supporting Vishal Jood.
Foreigners who overstay their visas and don’t make arrangements to leave the country on their own nor get in touch with the Australian immigration authorities can face deportation. The Australian government also charges overstayers for the cost of removing them from the country.
Vishal Joods backers who say he was actually fighting Khalistanis and protecting the Indian tricolor, have been taken for a ride by Indian politicians as an Australian court hearing criminal charges against a person cannot be influenced diplomatically. All accused also have the freedom of defense in court.
