9 Kasaragod men get jobs in Dubai after being duped by fake recruitment agent

Newsroom, May 2: The Delhi Police’s move to book Delhi Minorities Commission chairman Zafarul Islam Khan under sedition charges over his social media statement condemning Hindutva bigots has raised many eyebrows. 

A pubic statement has been issued in solidarity with Zafarul Islam Khan by a group of NGOs and citizens which condemned the media trial targeting Khan.

The statement demanded legal action against those who are distorting Khan's Facebook post and spreading false propaganda against him.

Delhi Police Special Cell registered the FIR against Khan on the complaint of a Vasant Kunj resident. The complaint came to the Lodhi Colony office of the special cell, after the assistant commissioner of police (ACP) Safdarjung Enclave forwarded it.

The investigation has been handed over to special cell inspector Praveen Kumar.

According to the FIR, Khan has been booked under several sections of the Indian Penal Code -- 124 A (sedition) and 153 A (Promoting enmity between different groups on grounds of religion, race, place of birth, residence, language, etc,).

Khan on April 28 had posted controversial comments on his Facebook page. "Mind you, bigots, Indian Muslims have opted until now not to complain to the Arab and Muslim world about your hate campaigns and lynchings and riots. The day they are pushed to do that, bigots will face an avalanche," Khan had written on Facebook.

However, the Delhi Minorities Commission's chief on Friday had apologised for his controversial remark and had said that he never tried to tarnish the image of India. He also removed the controversial post from the social media and issued a prolonged clarification.

Kasaragod, Apr 30: The Kasaragod District Collector Sajith Babu, his gun man and driver has entered in quarantine on Wednesday.

According to sources, the Collector had been asked to go on quarantine after the reports of a journalist, who interviewed him, was tested positive for the virus.

Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan at his routine evening press conference revealed the positivity of the journalist.

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.