15 Disqualified Congress-JD(S) Karnataka MLAs formally join BJP

Bengaluru, Mar 20: The high court on Thursday directed the government to notify on its official website the penal provisions to be enforced against private schools violating norms relating to fees and safety of students, among other things. A division bench of chief justice Abhay Shreeniwas Oka granted six weeks to the authorities to comply while disposing of a PIL filed by advocate NP Amrutesh.

Earlier, the state government submitted a memo stating that necessary amendments have been brought to Karnataka Education Act in 2017. It said any breach of students' safety entails a minimum jail term of six months and Rs 1 lakh fine for a convicted employee or member of the management. Any institution found guilty by the District Education Regulatory Authority will face disaffiliation and must pay a fine of Rs 10 lakh, the memo said.

Schools collecting donations and other fees beyond what is prescribed can be fined up to Rs 10 lakh and they must refund the excess fee.

In relation to schools charging for applications and brochures, the state capped their prices at Rs 5 and Rs 20 respectively, by issuing a gazzette notification last year.

Bengaluru, Feb 19: Pointing out that there was a deliberate attempt to cover up police excesses by implicating innocent persons at whim, the Karnataka High Court on Tuesday granted conditional bail to 21 people who were accused by police of involving in violence during the protests against the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) in Mangaluru.

Allowing the bail petitions of Ashik and 20 others from Udupi and Dakshina Kannada districts, Justice John Michael Cunha said the overzealousness of the police is also evident from the fact that FIRs were registered under Section 307 of IPC against the persons killed by the police themselves.

“In an offence involving a large number of people, the identity and participation of each accused must be fixed with reasonable certainty. In the present cases, the identity appears to have been fixed on the basis of their affiliation to PFI and they being members of the Muslim community. Though it is stated that the involvement of the petitioners is captured in CCTV footage and photographs, no such material is produced before the court showing the presence of any of the petitioners at the spot, armed with deadly weapons,” the judge noted.

In the statement of objections filed by the State Public Prosecutor-I, it was stated that there was a hint of Muslim youths holding protest on December 19, 2019, opposing the implementation of CAA. Prohibitory orders were clamped in that connection. This assertion indicated that the common object of the assembly was to oppose the implementation of CAA and National Register for Citizens (NRC) which, by itself, was not an “unlawful object”, the judge pointed out.

‘Pics show cops throwing stones at crowd’

Justice Cunha also said the material collected by the investigators did not contain any specific evidence regarding the presence of any of the petitioners at the spot. On the other hand, omnibus allegations were made against the Muslim crowd of 1,500-2,000, alleging that they were armed with weapons like stones, soda bottles and glass pieces. The photographs produced by the SPP depicted that hardly any member of the crowd were armed with weapons, except one of them holding a bottle. In none of these photographs, police station or policemen were seen in the vicinity, the judge noted.

“On the other hand, photographs produced by the petitioners show that the policemen themselves were pelting stones at the crowd. The petitioners have produced copies of the complaints lodged by the dependants of the deceased who died due to police firing and the endorsement made thereon reveals that even though the law required the police to register independent FIRs in view of the specific complaint made against the police officers making out cognizable offences, the police have failed to register FIRs. This goes to show that a deliberate attempt is underway to cover up police excesses by implicating innocent persons at the whims and caprice of the police,” the judge observed.

In the wake of counter-allegations against the police and in the backdrop of their failure to register FIRs based on complaints lodged by the families of victims, the possibility of false and mistaken implication could not be ruled out, the judge said. In these circumstances, it would be a travesty of justice to deny bail to the petitioners and sacrifice their liberties to the mercy of the district administration and police. The records indicate that a deliberate attempt has been made to trump up evidence and to deprive the liberties of the petitioners by fabricating evidence. None of the petitioners have any criminal antecedents, the court said.

“The allegations levelled against the petitioners are not punishable with death or imprisonment for life. There is no direct evidence to connect them with the alleged offence. The investigation appears to be malafide and partisan. In the circumstances, in order to protect the rights and liberties of the petitioners, it is necessary to admit them to bail,” the judge said.

The petitioners were arrested and remanded in judicial custody after the anti-CAA protests on charges of being members of an unlawful assembly, armed with lethal weapons, attempting to set fire to the North Police Station in Mangaluru, obstructing the police from discharging their duties and causing damage to public property, etc., on December 19 in violation of the prohibitory orders. They moved the High Court as their bail pleas had been rejected by a sessions court in Dakshina Kannada.

Bengaluru, Feb 1: The police have arrested two miscreants belonging to a saffron outfit after they threatened students in the city who were protesting the firing incident near Delhi’s Jamia Millia Islamia, telling them they would meet the same fate as the injured student.

Saffron extremist Gopal Sharma had opened fire at students protesting the Citizenship (Amendment) Act near the Delhi varsity on Thursday, injuring one.

The Bengaluru incident took place at Maurya Circle, where the nightlong demonstration against the Jamia firing and CAA began around 7.30pm. By 11pm, the number of protesters reduced to 30 but the group decided to stay back after getting the news of another alleged attack on women and Jamia students by Delhi police.

According to Adrian, a student who was at the scene, the small group of protesters stayed within a barricaded area on the road, chanting slogans, singing patriotic songs and playing music. “While we were raising anti-CAA slogans, two men from among us began shouting pro-CAA slogans. The duo was unknown and when we looked at them, they quietly moved away,” said Adrian, adding they were drunk and returned after a few minutes.

Saqib Idrees, another student protester, said the duo began to issue verbal threats. “They threatened us in Kannada that they would repeat the Jamia incident in Bengaluru,” said Saqib, adding the duo also taunted them saying ‘it’s not CAA down down, but you all will be brought down’.

When the students questioned the miscreants, cops stationed at the spot detained the duo. “Police were very cooperative. Almost 20 personnel were with us till 5am,” said Saqib.

Meanwhile, a friend of the duo watched the drama from a distance and approached the protesters to apologise on their behalf. “He said they belonged to the working class and FIRs would destroy their lives. He apologised to us and we decided to let the matter go. After all, we are Gandhians,” added Saqib.

Adrian said though the two men were drunk, their threats exposed their ideology. After the duo was detained, the students continued their protest till 5am and dispersed after singing the national anthem.

According to High Grounds police, the men are bank employees and were detained for disturbing the protesters at Maurya Junction. “They are from Andhra Pradesh and work in a PSU bank in the city. One of them is set to get married in February. He had thrown a party for his other friends for the same reason. The duo was drunk when confronted by the protesters. We booked a case of public nuisance and let them off after a warning,” police said.