Conflicting reports over revocation of Nimisha Priya's death sentence fuel uncertainty

According to Jawad Mustafawy, a representative of Kanthapuram’s office, who is privy to information about the ongoing consultations in Yemen, a high-level meeting involving Yemeni religious scholars, tribal leaders, and diplomatic interlocutors had resulted in a “revocation” of the death sentence.

“The execution has been called off following sustained mediation and the intervention of Sheikh Umar Hafeez Thangal. What remains are procedural steps and further engagement with the victim’s family,” Mustafawy told reporters, crediting the progress to Sufi-led dialogue channels.

No confirmation: MEA

However, the MEA said it had no such confirmation. In response to media queries, sources stated, “We have not received any formal communication from Yemeni authorities about the cancellation of the sentence.”

Also read: Nimisha Priya’s daughter appeals to Yemeni authorities for her mother’s release

The ministry’s position underlines the lack of official documentation or legal confirmation, a critical factor in Yemen, where judicial processes are intertwined with tribal customs, and forgiveness from the victim’s family is essential for a legal pardon in murder cases.

False reports

A day after reports emerged in Indian media, Abdul Fattah Mahdi, the brother of the deceased Yemeni man, Talal Abdo Mahdi, posted a strongly worded statement on Facebook rejecting claims of pardon.

The post, in Arabic, stated: “We have not forgiven. There is no agreement. No diya has been received. These reports are false.”

He went on to accuse the Indian media of glorifying a woman who, according to him, had committed a heinous crime.

Under Yemeni law, forgiveness must be granted by the family of the deceased, often through diya (blood money) and such settlements are formally recorded and validated.

Also read: Nimisha Priya case: What Yemen documents reveal about trial

The Save Nimisha Priya International Action Council, which has been coordinating efforts for her release, thanked Kanthapuram Musliyar for his efforts. “His intervention through religious diplomacy and engagement with tribal leadership has opened critical space for dialogue,” said K R Subhash Chandran, a key member and the lawyer who represents the council in the Supreme Court of India.

Moreover, he pointed out that the MEA or government was not part of the ongoing discussion for the last two weeks between the Sufi scholars and the victims family.

"Yesterday, they reached a crucial decision and that's why Kanthapuram's office released the information," he explained. Further, the Action Council hoped that the position taken by Talal's brother may not significantly impact the family's final decision on whether to pardon Nimish Priya. Chandran said, “Under Yemeni law, the right to pardon or accept blood money lies with the legal heirs of the deceased, typically the children and parents. Only in their absence does a sibling have any claim to that right."

In the wake of the announcement by Kanthapuram Musliyar’s office claiming that the death sentence has been revoked, Samuel Jerome, who was initially part of the action council and is hosting Nimisha’s mother in Yemen, publicly voiced concern, warning that premature declarations could risk derailing ongoing discussions with the victim’s family.

Layer of complexity

He posted on the Facebook that no official confirmation had been received yet. While Jerome is understood to be involved in facilitating certain interactions on the ground, several members within the Action Council privately believe that individual statements and attempts at personal positioning have added an unnecessary layer of complexity to an already fragile diplomatic situation.

Internal tensions within the Save Nimisha Priya International Action Council have become more apparent of late. A section of the council involved in legal efforts from India has raised concerns over the conduct of some members active in Yemen, particularly those who are stationed in Sana’a, including Jerome.

Some members have expressed unease over the lack of coordination and clarity in communication, especially at a time when delicate negotiations are underway.

Also read: Nimisha Priya case: Social media backlash threatens to derail pardon talks in Yemen

The crowdfunded amount, raised earlier for pre-negotiation efforts, was officially routed through the Indian embassy in Djibouti. But Jerome’s later distancing from the group’s coordination platforms, including a key WhatsApp group, has led to further unease.

Amid these developments, KA Paul, a Yemen-based evangelist from Hyderabad, posted a video on social media a week ago asserting that Nimisha Priya had been “pardoned” and credited the Modi government for making it happen.

Paul, who had not been involved in earlier mediation efforts, claimed that he was in touch with top international leaders and suggested that Indian diplomatic action had led to a resolution. His statements, however, have not been backed by any credible source or official document.

The timing of his entry, and his direct praise for the Union government, raised eyebrows among observers, particularly as the Union government itself, just two weeks ago, had submitted before the Supreme Court that it had “limited ability” to intervene in the case given Yemen’s legal framework and India’s restricted diplomatic presence there.

Growing contest for credit

The developments come amid what many see as a growing contest over credit, with multiple actors seeking visibility in a case that has garnered national attention. While Kanthapuram’s office has engaged through religious and tribal diplomacy, others have accused political elements of undercutting or attempting to overshadow these efforts without necessarily being involved in the ground-level talks.

Sources closely following the case, point to a lack of coordinated diplomatic communication, with three distinct centres: Kanthapuram’s delegation, the contingent working with the family in Sana’a, and figures like KA Paul sending divergent signals to both the Indian public and the Yemeni stakeholders.

“This is a highly sensitive case. Any premature or conflicting statement from the Indian side can confuse or offend the victim’s family which is central to any resolution,” said a consultant familiar with Yemeni tribal law and the ongoing negotiations.

Under Yemen’s existing legal framework, even if tribal or religious leaders agree to recommend a pardon, the final decision rests with the victim’s family and must be submitted through proper judicial channels. Until such documentation is processed, the death sentence legally stands.

Rights groups and legal experts have cautioned that excessive public claims, particularly when not backed by the victim’s family, could risk backfiring.

Caution advised

Meanwhile, Nimisha Priya remains in a Yemeni prison, and her family has been in Sana’a, hoping for a breakthrough.

Her mother Premakumari had been in Sana’ for almost an year now and her husband and daughter have arrived at Yemen a couple of days back. People close to the family say they remain hopeful but are cautious about celebrating any claim that lacks legal backing.

Even with the death sentence revoked, Nimisha Priya still faces the prospect of a life term in a Yemeni prison unless the victim’s family agrees to grant a full pardon for the crime.

While religious diplomacy has opened some doors, the final outcome hinges on careful negotiation and formal agreement not on competing claims from factions or political actors.