7 held for blackmailing bank manager after forcing him to pose with girl

Bengaluru, Feb 14: In a major embarrassment to the police, the Karnataka High Court has termed as illegal the prohibitory orders imposed under Section 144 of CrPC by the City Police Commissioner in December 2019 in the light of the anti-Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) protests in Bengaluru.

The orders were passed “without application of mind” and without following due procedures, the court noted. Giving reasons for upholding the arguments of the petitioners that there was no application of mind by the Police Commissioner (Bhaskar Rao) before imposing restrictions, a division bench of the High Court said he had not recorded the reasons, except reproducing the contents of letters addressed to him by the Deputy Commissioners of Police (DCPs). 

The state government had contended that prohibitory orders were passed based on reports submitted by the DCPs who expressed apprehension about anti-social elements creating law and order problems and damaging public property by taking advantage of the anti-CAA protests.  

The High Court bench said the Police Commissioner should have conducted inquiry as stated by the Supreme Court to check the reasons cited by the DCPs who submitted identical reports. Except for this, there were no facts laid out by the Police Commissioner, the court said.

“There is complete absence of reasons. If the order indicated that the Police Commissioner was satisfied by the apprehension of DCPs, it would have been another matter,” it said.  

“The apex court has held that it must record the reasons for imposition of restrictions and there has to be a formation of opinion by the district magistrate. Only then can  the extraordinary powers conferred on the district magistrate can be exercised. This procedure was not followed. Hence, exercise of power under Section 144 by the commissioner, as district magistrate, was not at all legal”, the bench said. 

“We hold that the order dated December 18, 2019 is illegal and cannot stand judicial scrutiny in terms of the apex court’s orders in the Ramlila Maidan case and Anuradha Bhasin case,” the HC bench said while upholding the arguments of Prof Ravivarma Kumar, who appeared for some of the petitioners.   

Partly allowing a batch of public interest petitions questioning the imposition of prohibitory orders and cancelling the permission granted for protesters in the city, the bench of Chief Justice Abhay Shreeniwas Oka and Justice Hemant Chandangoudar observed that, unfortunately, in the present case, there was no indication of application of mind in passing prohibitory orders.

The bench said the observation was confined to this order only and it cannot be applicable in general. If there is a similar situation (necessitating imposition of restrictions), the state is not helpless, the court said.

New Delhi, Jan 27: Non-Muslim refugees from Pakistan, Bangladesh and Afghanistan will have to provide proofs of their religious beliefs while applying for Indian citizenship under the controversial Citizenship Amendment Bill (CAA), officials said on Monday.

The applicants belonging to Hindu, Sikh, Christian, Buddhist, Jain or Parsi faiths will also have to furnish documents to prove that they entered India on or before December 31, 2014.

Those who will seek Indian citizenship under the CAA will have to provide proofs of their religious beliefs and this will be mentioned in the rules to be issued under the CAA, a government official said.

According to the CAA, members of Hindu, Sikh, Buddhist, Jain, Parsi and Christian communities who have come from Pakistan, Bangladesh and Afghanistan till December 31, 2014, due to religious persecution there will not be treated as illegal immigrants and will be given Indian citizenship.

The central government is also likely to give a relatively smaller window of just three months to those who want to apply for Indian citizenship in Assam under the CAA, another official said.

Some Assam-specific provisions are expected to be incorporated in the rules to be issued for the implementation of the CAA.

Assam chief minister Sarbananda Sonowal and his finance minister Himanta Biswa Sarma had made a request about a fortnight ago to keep a limited period window for applying under the CAA and also incorporate some other Assam-specific provisions in the CAA rules.

The move comes in view of continuing protests against the CAA in Assam that have been going on since the legislation was passed by Parliament in December last year.

There has been a growing feeling among the indigenous people of Assam that the newly enacted legislation will hurt their interests politically, culturally as well as socially.

The Assam Accord provides for detection and deportation of all illegal immigrants who have entered the country after 1971 and are living in the state, irrespective of their religion.

The protesters in Assam say that the CAA violates the provisions of the Assam Accord.

Bengaluru, Feb 13: Karnataka Chief Minister BS Yediyurappa on Thursday said the government had initiated measures to implement the Sarojini Mahishi report as the 12-hour Karnataka bandh call by several pro-Kannada organisations under the banner of Karnataka Sanghatanegala Okkoota began on Thursday.

“Government always stood for Kannada and Kannadigas and initiated measures to implement the Sarojini Mahishi report,” Yediyurappa said. Meanwhile, in Bengaluru, Ola, Uber and auto services were affected even though buses were plying as usual. Security has also been beefed up in Bengaluru after stones were pelted at a Tirupati-Mangaluru bus in Farangipet, though no one was injured.

Bangalore University has postponed all postgraduate (PG) exams scheduled for today. A pro-Kannada activist, Praveen Shetty, was kept under house arrest and police have detained a few people, including those involved in Cauvery protests and other bandh cases.

The organisations are demanding the implementation of a report by former union minister Sarojini Mahishi that recommends a certain percentage of jobs to Kannadigas in public sector undertakings, private companies, and multinational companies. The report was submitted in 1984 but is yet to be implemented.