BJP to finalize DK ZP president soon

Bengaluru, Feb 11: A 36-year-old woman who fought back after being stabbed eight times by a helmet-clad intruder succumbed to injuries at a hospital.

Susheela was in shock after she pulled off the attacker’s helmet as it was her own brother-in-law. Before breathing her last, she explained the sequence of events to the police.

She said her brother-in-law attacked her because he was eyeing their ancestral property worth over Rs 10 crore. “Susheela put up a stiff resistance and identified her assailant. But the stab injuries proved to be fatal,” said a police officer. Based on her statement, Ananth Kumar, 42, was arrested on murder charges.

The attack occurred on February 7 at Honaganahatti village in Tavarekere, off Magadi Road. Susheela, whose husband Gangaraju died in a road accident 12 years ago, was living with her 14-year-old daughter and 75-year-old mother, Rudramma.

On Friday, her daughter had gone to school and Rudramma was sitting outside the house when a man walked in wearing a full-faced helmet and attacked Susheela with a knife. She defended herself with a stick used for making ragi balls and by throwing chilli powder at his face. But the attacker stabbed her on the hand, neck and head. He fled when Susheela identified him and raised an alarm. Neighbours rushed her to a hospital.

During questioning, Kumar reportedly confessed to the crime, saying he wanted to get rid of her as she was not agreeing to sell five acres of their ancestral property.

Susheela’s nephew Kiran G said: “The family owned six acres. Kumar sold one acre for Rs 50 lakh a few years ago after convincing Susheela. He, however, paid her only Rs 5 lakh. Lately, he was pestering Susheela to sell the remaining land as buyers were ready to pay Rs 2.5 crore per acre. But she was hesitating as she had been cheated by him earlier.”

Police are now examining the circumstances under which Gangaraju was killed. “We learnt the driver who had been arrested in connection with Gangaraju’s accident is currently working with Kumar,” said an officer.

Marriages will have to shed decadence as the state government, in an advisory, has restricted the number of guests to 50 and barred consumption of liquor at such events. 

The advisory was issued in anticipation that the COVID-19 lockdown will be eased in a phased manner. 

The advisory, issued by the Department of Health & Family Welfare, states that events can be held in a “suitable public place with good natural ventilation (no air condition).”

For latest updates on coronavirus outbreak, click here
All guests must have the Arogya Setu app on their phones and the contact details all marriage attendees should be maintained. 

No person from a containment zone will be allowed to attend the event, and persons aged above 65 years, pregnant women and children below 10 years are not permitted. 

Sanitizers are to be provided at the entry and at “appropriate” places. Thermal screening is a must at the entry point of the venue. The scanner should be held 3-15 cm away from a person’s forehead. “Anyone found having a fever (37.5 degree centigrade or 99.5 farenheit), cold, cough, difficulty in breathing shall not be permitted to attend the event and immediately referred to seek medical advice,” the advisory said. 

Besides prohibition on consumption of alcohol, the advisory said paan, gutka and tobacco will not be allowed. 

Face masks are compulsory and all persons should maintain a physical distance of more than one metre. The venue shall be clean and hygienic, with a prohibition on spitting in public places.

A nodal person should be identified to oversee the arrangements, the advisory said.

New Delhi, Jan 19: Senior Congress leader Kapil Sibal on Sunday asserted that every state assembly has the constitutional right to pass a resolution and seek the amended Citizenship Act's withdrawal, but if the law is declared constitutional by the Supreme Court then it will be problematic to oppose it.

His remarks came a day after he had said there is no way a state can deny the implementation of the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) when it is already passed by the Parliament.

"I believe the CAA is unconstitutional. Every State Assembly has the constitutional right to pass a resolution and seek its withdrawal. When and if the law is declared to be constitutional by the Supreme Court then it will be problematic to oppose it. The fight must go on!" Sibal said in a tweet.

His remarks on the CAA at the Kerala Literature Festival (KLF) on Saturday had caused a flutter as several non-BJP governments, including Kerala, Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh, West Bengal and Maharashtra, have voiced their disagreement with the CAA as well as National Register of Citizens (NRC) and National Population Register (NPR).

"If the CAA is passed no state can say 'I will not implement it'. It is not possible and is unconstitutional. You can oppose it, you can pass a resolution in the Assembly and ask the central government to withdraw it.

"But constitutionally saying that I won't implement, it is going to be problematic and going to create more difficulties," said the former minister of law and justice.