'Had No Role': Vijayan Govt On Jyoti Malhotra's Visit To Promote Kerala Tourism
The Kerala government on Tuesday responded to allegations surrounding the arrest of YouTuber Jyoti Malhotra on espionage charges, clarifying that her visit to the state earlier this year was arranged through a private agency and had no political or security backing from the government itself.
Malhotra, a 33-year-old travel vlogger from Hisar, Haryana, who ran the YouTube channel 'Travel with Jo', was arrested on 16 May under the Official Secrets Act and the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS). She is accused of spying for Pakistan, with intelligence agencies probing whether she passed on sensitive information under the guise of travel blogging.
The controversy erupted after documents obtained through the Right to Information (RTI) Act revealed that Malhotra was one of 41 influencers invited as part of a government-funded tourism promotion campaign in Kerala. Her travel, accommodation, and filming costs during her stay were covered by a designated public relations agency contracted by Kerala Tourism.
Kerala Tourism Minister PA Mohammed Riyas addressed the issue and firmly defended the state's position, stating that the government played no role in the invitation.
VIDEO | 'Jyoti Malhotra was invited by the designated agency well before any case against her surfaced, and the Kerala government had no role in selecting influencers", said Tourism Minister Mohammed Riyas. He made the statement in response to allegations regarding the arrest of… pic.twitter.com/Na8PVLDgi4 — Press Trust of India (@PTI_News) July 8, 2025
'Jyoti Malhotra was invited by the designated agency well before any case against her surfaced, and the Kerala government had no role in selecting influencers," Riyas stated.
'This was part of a larger influencer campaign aimed at promoting Kerala. Everything was done transparently and in good faith," he added.
The minister criticised attempts to link the state government to alleged espionage. 'This is not a government that facilitates espionage. The media must understand how government systems work. No one could have foreseen this," Riyas said, referring to the influencer outreach programme that followed standard procedures used by previous administrations.
According to the RTI, Malhotra's visit included multiple destinations such as Kochi, Kannur, Kozhikode, Alappuzha, Munnar, and Thiruvananthapuram. She arrived through Kannur airport and later returned to Delhi by train. Her vlogs, featuring Theyyam performances and scenic Kerala backwaters, were shared across social media platforms.
Malhotra is currently in judicial custody. Her lawyer, Kumar Mukesh, confirmed that her custody has been extended by 14 days, with the next hearing scheduled for 21 July. She appeared before the court via video conference.
(With inputs from agencies)
view comments
First Published:
July 08, 2025, 17:07 IST
Disclaimer: Comments reflect users' views, not News18's. Please keep discussions respectful and constructive. Abusive, defamatory, or illegal comments will be removed. News18 may disable any comment at its discretion. By posting, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hindu
9 minutes ago
- The Hindu
Protection against misuse: on POCSO Act, adolescent sex
The key objective of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012 is the protection of children, but over the past few years, courts around the country and rights activists have called for some exemptions. Noticing a trend that adolescents, above 15 years but under 18, in voluntary relationships and having consensual sex were often being persecuted, the courts sought a review. In that backdrop, senior advocate Indira Jaising's written submission to the Supreme Court that consensual sex between teenagers aged 16-18 years must not be criminalised is a welcome move. She was appointed amicus curiae and her submissions are part of a petition filed by advocate Nipun Saxena. Her brief challenged the designation of 18 years as the age of consent. She said the only solution lies in declaring that sex between consenting adolescents between the age of 16, an almost universal age of sexual maturity, and 18, is not a form of 'abuse'. Ms. Jaising called for this exception to be read into the POCSO Act and Section 63 (sexual offences), of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS). 'Such an exception would preserve the protective intent of the statute while preventing its misuse against adolescent relationships that are not exploitative in nature,' she said. In a 2023 report, the Law Commission had said that it was against changing the age of consent. It advised 'guided judicial discretion' instead, while sentencing in cases that involve children between 16 and 18 years in a voluntary, consensual relationship. Under the POCSO Act and under several provisions of the Indian Penal Code and the BNS, whoever commits a penetrative sexual assault on a child — who is anyone below 18 years — can face stringent punishment under Section 6 of the POCSO Act, Section 9 of the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006, and provisions of the IPC and BNS. A 16-year-old is considered a 'child' under Section 2(d) of the POCSO Act and hence her consent does not matter. But caveats have to be put in place so that the broad intent of the law is adhered to, as the Madras High Court suggested in 2021, in Vijayalakshmi vs State Rep. The High Court said the age difference in consensual relationships should not be more than five years to ensure that a girl of an impressionable age is not taken advantage of by an older person. Educating adolescents about the law on sexual offences and its consequences is a must too. Criminalising normal adolescent behaviour is not the way to protect against non-consensual, exploitative sexual offences.
Time of India
38 minutes ago
- Time of India
Inter-state chain snatcher posing as delivery person held
Panaji: Goa police on Sunday arrested an allegedly notorious inter-state chain snatcher who used to pose as a courier delivery person. Porvorim police arrested one accused person for chain-snatching in PDA Colony, Porvorim. A complaint was lodged by a woman informing the police that an unidentified person came on a scooter outside her house and told her that she had a parcel. The person then snatched her gold chain worth Rs 1.8 lakh and fled from the spot. Based on the complaint, Porvorim PI Rahul Parab said that they collected CCTV footage and other evidence and zeroed in on the suspect who was found staying in a guesthouse at Calangute. 'The accused has been is identified as Kishorbhai Mohanbhai Macchi, also known as Ranpariya Ajay Hasmukhbhai, 44, a resident of Gujarat,' Parab said. The scooter used by the accused has also been recovered. 'The accused has been arrested under Section 304 of BNS, 2023,' Parab said. Macchi was involved in many crimes since 2015 and was previously arrested in Gujarat and Rajasthan. He was last arrested in 2023 in Kota, Rajasthan. Parab said that during the interrogation the accused revealed that he committed a similar crime in June 2025 at Saligao, where he robbed a gold chain. Porvorim police have found leads on the stolen gold chain and are in the process of recovering it.
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
HC notice on woman's plea
Kendrapada: Orissa high court on July 21 issued a notice to Odisha Information Commission, state information commissioner, public information officer of the regulated market committee (RMC), Jajpur, and first appellate authority of RMC on a writ petition filed by Shantilata Sahoo, a resident of Jajpur district, challenging a decision of the information commissioner in an RTI case. The petitioner had moved the state information commissioner seeking details regarding disciplinary action taken against her husband, a former employee of RMC, under the RTI Act. Despite directions from the first appellate authority to provide full information, the RMC allegedly failed to comply. In its May 15 reply, the information commissioner said RMC is not a 'public authority' under the RTI Act, 2005, and hence not obliged to furnish the information sought. Challenging it, the petitioner, represented by advocate Akhand, moved the high court seeking to set aside the information commissioner's decision. In her writ petition, Sahoo argued that RMCs were established by the state govt under the Orissa Agricultural Produce Markets Act, 1956, and hence fall within the definition of "public authority" under Section 2(h) of the RTI Act. When the matter came up for hearing on July 21, Justice V Narasingh stated, "The counsel of the petitioner submits that without due application of mind, the appeal was dismissed. In such view of the matter, issue notice to all the four opposite parties."
