After N-E, it's Karnataka's turn now to finish off Congress: PM Narendra Modi

Mangaluru, Mar 29: The state government has lifted the restrictions on the movement of chicken and eggs, thus ensuring the availability of protein-based nutrition to consumers.

Due to the 21-day lockdown in the State, police and other regulatory authorities were not allowing movement of poultry products, which not only had affected the entire poultry sector but also the consumers. The Karnataka Poultry Farmers and Breeders Association (KPFBA) had made a representation to the government to lift the restrictions.

The Secretary of Animal Husbandry and Fisheries, A B Ibrahim in a circular dated March 27, 2020 night , said that the minimal husbandry sector came under essential services and is given exemption during the lockdown period. He cited the letter which provides for the exemption, issued by the Government of India Home Secretary and the Union Joint Secretary of Animal Husbandry and Dairying.

Bengaluru, Mar 9: The political crisis faced by Kamal Nath government in Madhya Pradesh appears to have accentuated with 13 party MLAs and six ministers reported to be in Bengaluru.

The developments have come amid factional differences in the party unit and at a time the party has to finalise its Rajya Sabha candidates from the state.

Sources said the number of Congress MLAs who were in Bengaluru had gone up to 19 and one more MLA expected to reach Bengaluru by Monday night. They said the MLAs have come in batches and include six ministers from Madhya Pradesh.

The developments came on a day state chief Chief Minister Kamal Nath met party chief Sonia Gandhi and discussed the political situation in the state.

The sources said that MLAs are likely to be shifted to a resort on the outskirts of Bengaluru.

According to the sources, BJP Mahadevpura MLA Arvind Limbavali has been in touch with the Congress MLAs. They said 16 MLAs were brought at HAL airport Bengaluru by a special flight and were staying in a hotel at present.

The session of Madhya Pradesh assembly will begin on March 16 and the BJP may bring no-confidence motion against the Kamal Nath government.

Kamal Nath had said after his meeting with Gandhi that Congress MLAs who were reportedly missing have returned and had informed him that they were on 'tirth yatra'.

"Congress MLAs came back and said to me that they went on' tirth yatra (pilgrimage)".

The Congress has accused the BJP of trying to topple the party government. Party leader Digvijaya Singh had earlier alleged that BJP leaders Shivraj Singh Chouhan and Narottam Mishra were offering bribes of Rs 25-35 crore to Congress MLAs in order to bring down the Congress government in the state. The BJP had refuted the allegations.

In 2018 assembly elections, Congress won 114 seats in the 230-member Assembly and formed the government with the support of four Independent MLAs and two BSP MLAs and a legislator from the Samajwadi Party (SP). The BJP had secured 109 seats in the state assembly.

Last week,Madhya Pradesh Labour Minister Mahendra Singh Sisodia had warned that the state government will face a crisis if it "ignores or disrespects" party leader Jyotiraditya Scindia.

Scindia had said last month that he will not hesitate to hit the roads if promises made in a manifesto by Kamal Nath-led government in Madhya Pradesh were not fulfilled.

Kamal Nath had responded to the remarks saying, "To utar jayein" (Let him hit the streets if he wants to).

Congress MLA Bisahulal Singh, who was "missing" for the past few days, returned to Bhopal on Sunday and said he had gone on a pilgrimage.

Independent MLA Surendra Singh said on Monday that he was hoping to become a minister in Madhya Pradesh government soon.

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.