Amit Shah accorded warm welcome at Mangaluru Airport, proceeds to Kerala

Bengaluru, Apr 21: Bengaluru Police and administration has issued prohibitory orders in the city, with exemptions to essential and emergency services, to enforce the COVID-19 lockdown.

"In exercise of the powers conferred under Section 144 (1) Code of Criminal Procedure, I, Bhaskar Rao, IPS, Commissioner of Police and Additional District Magistrate, Bengaluru city hereby issue a prohibitory order within the limits of Bengaluru city commissioner on midnight of April 20, 2020, to midnight May 3, 2020," the order issued on Monday said.

Section 144 of the CrPC pertains to the power conferred to a District Magistrate, a sub-divisional Magistrate or any other Executive Magistrate to issue orders in urgent cases of a nuisance of apprehended danger.

"As per the guidelines of the Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India on the measures for containment of COVID-19 epidemic, it is imperative to take stringent measures in the jurisdiction of Commissioner of Bengaluru city to prevent the spread of the disease," the order said.

As per the order, the offices of the Government of India, its autonomous and subordinate offices and public corporations shall remain closed with the exception of defence, central armed police force, treasury, public utilities, disaster management, power generation, and post office, etc.

Offices to the state government, their autonomous bodies, corporation, etc shall also remain closed except police, home guard, civil defence, fire and emergency services, electricity, water, sanitation and Mandis operated by Agriculture Produce Market Committee, etc, it added.

It said that municipal bodies, with staff required for essential services, will also remain functional during this period. Other essential and emergency services, like hospitals, shops, etc have also been exempted from the prohibitory orders.

Puttur, Apr 6: A person reportedly has been booked for allegedly posting derogatory remarks against minority community on social media platforms.

The accused is reported to be a resident of Belandur village of Puttur Taluk.
The case has been registered at Bellare Police Station.

According to the reports, Kusumadhara had posted derogatory remarks about the faith and minority community. A complaint in this regard was filed by Savanur SDPI member Mohammed Saheer at Bellare Police Station, adding that his remarks in the post would create divide and communal disturbance in the society.

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.