BJP releases manifesto for Karnataka polls, reaches out to farmers

Abu Dhabi-based NMC Healthcare has reportedly received bids to sell its distribution unit and will soon be selling it to different parties.

The development comes over three months after NMC Healthcare’s founder and then-chairman B R Shetty stepped down amid allegations of massive fraud. 

The company, which recently laid off hundreds of workers, is offloading stake in the subsidiary as it is considered non-core and requires substantially high working capital to run the operations. In addition, this stake sale will help the company pay off some of its debt

"There are parties who have strong interest in the distribution business. NMC will be offloading the unit soon and that also to different parties," a source said.

"The company is in the process of exploring options for NMC Trading, the group's distribution business, which it has determined to be non-core and requiring substantial levels of working capital. The process should not materially adversely impact distributors' activities, nor NMC Trading's customers," an NMC Healthcare spokeswoman said.

The UK-court has appointed Alvarez & Marsal as administrator to oversee the operations of the debt-ridden hospital operator. The healthcare firm has been caught in a whirlpool of $6.6 billion debt while its senior former high management team is under investigation for financial irregularities.

The UAE Central Bank has direct local banks to freeze all bank accounts of NMC founder BR Shetty and his family members as well as accounts of those companies where he has a stake. The Central Bank move is subsequent to a criminal complaint filed by Abu Dhabi Commercial Bank, which has the largest exposure to NMC Healthcare, amounting Dh3 billion.

As the company faces financial difficulties, Reuters reported that NMC Health delayed May staff salaries and now expects to complete making payments by the first week of June.

The spokeswoman said: "The company has been in regular dialogue with its creditor constituencies through various creditor committees, including the direct bank lenders to its NMC Trading businesses."

Thiruvananthapuram, Jan 1: Kerala chief minister Pinarayi Vijayan on Wednesday said that the resolution passed by the Kerala Assembly is against the "unconstitutional Act passed by the Centre".

"The resolution passed by Kerala Assembly is against the unconstitutional Act passed by the Centre. It has been noticed by the whole country," Vijayan said.

The Kerala Assembly had on Tuesday passed a resolution seeking withdrawal of the Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019.

Before the resolution was passed against the Act, Vijayan in a special Assembly session targeted RSS and said that citizenship law is part of an agenda.

"The CAA is part of an agenda. Muslims are being considered as internal enemies by RSS, who is controlling the ruling dispensation at the Centre," he alleged.

The new law grants citizenship to Hindus, Sikhs, Jains, Parsis, Buddhists and Christians fleeing religious persecution in Pakistan, Afghanistan and Bangladesh who came to India on or before December 31, 2014.

Meanwhile, on Wednesday while talking about women safety, the Chief Minister said, "Those women, who are traveling face many problems, particularly regarding accommodation. To address this, government will start accommodation facilities in all towns. This project will be implemented with the help of local bodies."

Reacting to the development in the Kerala Assembly, BJP leader Mukhtar Abbas Naqvi said that Assembly has insulted the Constitution and parliament by passing a resolution seeking withdrawal of the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA).

"The Constitution has delineated clearly the roles of parliament and state legislatures. When people who have taken an oath of the constitution, destroy it, it is a most irresponsible act. Both the houses of parliament have passed CAA and if a state assembly tries to hijack the Act it is an insult not only of the constitution but the parliament as well," Naqvi told news agency.

Bengaluru, Feb 19: Pointing out that there was a deliberate attempt to cover up police excesses by implicating innocent persons at whim, the Karnataka High Court on Tuesday granted conditional bail to 21 people who were accused by police of involving in violence during the protests against the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) in Mangaluru.

Allowing the bail petitions of Ashik and 20 others from Udupi and Dakshina Kannada districts, Justice John Michael Cunha said the overzealousness of the police is also evident from the fact that FIRs were registered under Section 307 of IPC against the persons killed by the police themselves.

“In an offence involving a large number of people, the identity and participation of each accused must be fixed with reasonable certainty. In the present cases, the identity appears to have been fixed on the basis of their affiliation to PFI and they being members of the Muslim community. Though it is stated that the involvement of the petitioners is captured in CCTV footage and photographs, no such material is produced before the court showing the presence of any of the petitioners at the spot, armed with deadly weapons,” the judge noted.

In the statement of objections filed by the State Public Prosecutor-I, it was stated that there was a hint of Muslim youths holding protest on December 19, 2019, opposing the implementation of CAA. Prohibitory orders were clamped in that connection. This assertion indicated that the common object of the assembly was to oppose the implementation of CAA and National Register for Citizens (NRC) which, by itself, was not an “unlawful object”, the judge pointed out.

‘Pics show cops throwing stones at crowd’

Justice Cunha also said the material collected by the investigators did not contain any specific evidence regarding the presence of any of the petitioners at the spot. On the other hand, omnibus allegations were made against the Muslim crowd of 1,500-2,000, alleging that they were armed with weapons like stones, soda bottles and glass pieces. The photographs produced by the SPP depicted that hardly any member of the crowd were armed with weapons, except one of them holding a bottle. In none of these photographs, police station or policemen were seen in the vicinity, the judge noted.

“On the other hand, photographs produced by the petitioners show that the policemen themselves were pelting stones at the crowd. The petitioners have produced copies of the complaints lodged by the dependants of the deceased who died due to police firing and the endorsement made thereon reveals that even though the law required the police to register independent FIRs in view of the specific complaint made against the police officers making out cognizable offences, the police have failed to register FIRs. This goes to show that a deliberate attempt is underway to cover up police excesses by implicating innocent persons at the whims and caprice of the police,” the judge observed.

In the wake of counter-allegations against the police and in the backdrop of their failure to register FIRs based on complaints lodged by the families of victims, the possibility of false and mistaken implication could not be ruled out, the judge said. In these circumstances, it would be a travesty of justice to deny bail to the petitioners and sacrifice their liberties to the mercy of the district administration and police. The records indicate that a deliberate attempt has been made to trump up evidence and to deprive the liberties of the petitioners by fabricating evidence. None of the petitioners have any criminal antecedents, the court said.

“The allegations levelled against the petitioners are not punishable with death or imprisonment for life. There is no direct evidence to connect them with the alleged offence. The investigation appears to be malafide and partisan. In the circumstances, in order to protect the rights and liberties of the petitioners, it is necessary to admit them to bail,” the judge said.

The petitioners were arrested and remanded in judicial custody after the anti-CAA protests on charges of being members of an unlawful assembly, armed with lethal weapons, attempting to set fire to the North Police Station in Mangaluru, obstructing the police from discharging their duties and causing damage to public property, etc., on December 19 in violation of the prohibitory orders. They moved the High Court as their bail pleas had been rejected by a sessions court in Dakshina Kannada.