A 50-year-old Indian-origin motel manager was beheaded in front of his wife and son in Texas following a dispute over a washing machine, police said.

The suspect, a co-worker with a criminal record, has been arrested and charged with capital murder.

The incident took place on Wednesday morning at the Downtown Suites motel in Dallas.

Chandra Mouli “Bob” Nagamallaiah, originally from Karnataka, was killed after a dispute over a broken washing machine with his co-worker Yordanis Cobos-Martinez, according to the Dallas Police Department.

Cobos-Martinez, 37, reportedly became enraged when Nagamallaiah asked another person to translate his instructions instead of addressing him directly. Surveillance footage showed Cobos-Martinez retrieving a machete and attacking Nagamallaiah.

The victim fled toward the motel office where his wife and 18-year-old son were present, but the suspect pursued him, carrying out the assault despite their attempts to intervene.

Cobos-Martine, who has a prior criminal history in Houston, including arrests for auto theft and assault, is being held without bond. If convicted, he could face life imprisonment without parole or the death penalty.

Known as Bob to friends and family, Nagamallaiah was remembered as a loving husband, devoted father, and kind soul who touched the lives of everyone he knew.

“This unimaginable tragedy was not only sudden but deeply traumatic,” friends said.

“Bob’s life was taken in a brutal attack that occurred in front of his wife and son, who bravely tried to protect him. The shocking nature of this event has shaken our community.” Friends, family, and the local Indian community are coming together to support his family.

A fundraiser has been set up to help cover funeral expenses, immediate living costs, and his son’s college education. Funeral services for Nagamallaiah are scheduled for Saturday. (Agencies)

Named after first Vice President S Radhakrishnan and strongly rooted in the RSS and the BJP, Chandrapuram Ponnusamy Radhakrishnan brings with him a rich political and administrative experience as the 15th vice president of India, which his supporters believe will also prove handy in his role as the ex-officio chairperson of the Rajya Sabha.

Seen as a soft-spoken and non-confrontational leader, the 67-year-old Radhakrishnan took oath on Friday. He succeeds Jagdeep Dhankhar, who resigned as vice president on July 21, taking everyone by surprise. Radhakrishnan is the third leader from Tamil Nadu to occupy the coveted post.

Dhankhar was known for his frequent run-ins with the Opposition, and had even faced an impeachment notice from them.

Described as a ‘Pachai Tamizhan’ (true-blue Tamil) by well-wishers, Radhakrishnan was serving as the governor of Maharashtra when he was named as the vice presidential nominee of the BJP-led NDA.

On Tuesday, when he was elected as the vice president, his mother Janaki Ammal fondly recalled the story behind his name.

“When my son was born, the then President Radhakrishnan was in office. He was a teacher, and I too was a teacher. In his memory, I named my son after him. At that time, my husband looked at me and asked, ‘are you giving this name because you want your son to become the President one day?’ After 62 years, just as my husband had said, it has come true,” she had told reporters in Tamil Nadu.

Radhakrishnan on Tuesday described his election to the second-highest Constitutional post as a victory of the nationalistic ideology and vowed to work towards making India a developed nation by 2047.

He won the vice presidential election by bagging 452 votes, while the opposition candidate, B Sudershan Reddy, polled 300 votes.

“The other side camp (opposition alliance) said that this (election) is an ideological fight, but from the voting pattern, we understand that the nationalistic ideology has emerged victorious,” Radhakrishnan said in his first public remarks after the win.

“It is a victory for every Indian; we all have to work together. If we have to develop Viksit Bharat by 2047, which means we should not do politics in everything, now we will have to concentrate on development,” he had said.

A two-term member of the Lok Sabha from Coimbatore during the tenure of prime minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee, Radhakrishnan came close to becoming a Union minister, but had to lose out to fellow Tamilian Pon Radhakrishnan in 1998 after some confusion over his name by the then floor managers of the BJP.

Radhakrishnan joined the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) as a teenager and rose through the ranks in the organisation and later in the BJP, gaining acceptability in the party and the state.

A member of the socially dominant and economically prosperous Kongu Vellalar Gounder community, he became the secretary of the BJP’s Tamil Nadu unit in 1996 and served as the party’s state unit president between 2003 and 2006.

An avid sportsperson, Radhakrishnan was a college champion in table tennis and a long-distance runner. He also enjoys cricket and volleyball.

Radhakrishnan is considered an untainted leader with rich political and administrative experience for the vice president’s office and this would also prove useful as the chairman of the Rajya Sabha.

“Thiru CP Radhakrishnan Ji has rich experience as MP and Governor of various states. His Parliamentary interventions were always incisive. During his gubernatorial tenures, he focused on addressing challenges faced by common citizens. These experiences ensured that he has vast knowledge of legislative and Constitutional matters. I am confident he will be an inspiring vice president,” Prime Minister Narendra Modi had said after the NDA chose Radhakrishnan as the vice presidential candidate.

The Tamil Nadu leader is said to be held in high esteem across party lines in his state, resulting in the BJP giving him multiple gubernatorial assignments in Jharkhand, Telangana, Maharashtra and Puducherry.

Radhakrishnan’s candidature also seeks to disarm the Opposition of a key political narrative, as he is the first OBC leader from South India to be named for the vice-president’s office.

An official profile circulated by the NDA projects Radhakrishnan as a leader who is eminent, knowledgeable and untainted by any legal accusations.

Radhakrishnan’s political innings started with his association with organisations such as the RSS and the Jan Sangh.

He took up student politics and has since used politics as a medium to serve the people.

Radhakrishnan’s track record of holding electoral, organisational and constitutional responsibilities shows that he is set to create history as the vice president of India.

He was sworn in as the governor of Maharashtra on July 31, 2024. Before this, he served as the governor of Jharkhand for nearly one-and-a-half years.

Born on October 20, 1957, at Tiruppur in Tamil Nadu, Radhakrishnan has a Bachelor’s degree in Business Administration.

Starting as an RSS swayamsevak at the age of 16, he became a state executive committee member of the Bharatiya Janasangh in 1974.

Between 2004 and 2007, Radhakrishnan served as the Tamil Nadu BJP president. In this role, he undertook a 19,000-km ‘Rath Yatra’ that lasted for 93 days. (Agencies)

Calling itself the “custodian of the Constitution”, the Supreme Court on Thursday asked if it could “sit idle” if a constitutional functionary like Governor failed to discharge duties as it reserved the verdict on the presidential reference on grant of assent to bills.

In the marathon hearings spanning 10 days, a Constitution bench of headed by Chief Justice B R Gavai heard legal luminaries including Attorney General R Venkataramani, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta and senior advocates Kapil Sibal, Abhishek Singhvi, Gopal Subramanium, Arvind Datar and others on the presidential reference which centered around Article 200 and 201 and the key issue whether constitutional court can impose timelines for governors and President to assent to bills.

On the last day, the bench, also comprising Justices Surya Kant, Vikram Nath, P S Narasimha and A S Chandurkar, interjected Mehta when he referred to the separation of powers as one of the basic structures of the Constitution and said the court should not fix timelines and interfere with the discretionary powers of governors.

“Whosoever high one may be, as a custodian of the Constitution (refers to SC)… I publicly say that I am a firm believer in the doctrine of separation of powers and though judicial activism has to be there, there should not be judicial terrorism or adventurism. But at the same time, if one wing of democracy fails to discharge its duty, is the custodian of the Constitution powerless and would sit idle?” the CJI asked.

Mehta said, “Not only the court, the executive is also a custodian of the fundamental rights of citizens…Legislature is also custodian, all three organs.” The law officer went on, “But, issuing mandamus (a writ asking a person to perform a public duty) to governors with regard to the legislatively discretionary functions of a coordinate constitutional functionary would violate the theory of separation of powers and this separation of power is a part of basic structure.” Mehta said while governors couldn’t sit perpetually over a bill, it didn’t mean they lacked discretionary powers under Article 200 and timelines could be fixed for granting assent as a “straitjacket formula”.

He went on to outline governors’ discretionary powers even in the case of promulgation of ordinance by the state government.

Assailing the submissions of opposition-ruled states which stressed Governor ought to act on the aid and advice of the council of ministers only, Mehta asked, “Suppose a state legislature passes a bill declaring it will no longer be a part of the Union of India, the Governor has no choice but to withhold assent.” He underscored the constitutional discretion to governors and President in certain contexts, though he said their actions were ordinarily guided by ministerial aid and advice.

Article 200, he said, provides Governor four options on bills and contains implied discretion, particularly in situations where a bill undermines constitutional values or carries national implications.

The law officer said the term “as soon as possible” used in Article 200 cannot mean indefinitely.

He reiterated 90 per cent of the bills passed by state assemblies since 1970 have received gubernatorial assent within a month whereas assents were withheld by governors only in 20 instances of the total 17,150 bills.

Addressing the absence of express timelines in the constitutional text, Mehta said it reflected “cautious choice of words” rather than vacuum.

“This system has functioned in harmony for decades. Only recently, with the NCT Delhi episode, has litigation on this issue proliferated,” he added.

He said there was no vacuum in the constitutional scheme where the court should step in and fix timelines for governors.

The court would likely opine on the 14 questions referred to by President Droupadi Murmu, including whether constitutional authorities could indefinitely withhold assent to bills and if courts could impose mandatory time frames.

The issues essentially relate to Article 200 which governs powers of Governor regarding bills passed by the state legislature, allowing them to either assent to the bill, withhold assent, return the bill for reconsideration or reserve the bill for the consideration of the President.

In May, President Murmu exercised powers under Article 143(1) to know from the top court whether judicial orders could impose timelines for the exercise of discretion by the President while dealing with bills passed by state assemblies. (Agenciese)