BJP’s poll strategy is telling lies and instigating communal sentiments: CM

Udupi, Jan 16: Admar Mutt Junior seer Eshapriya Theertha Swami is all set to take over the reins of Krishna Mutt during the 250th Paryayotsava, scheduled to be held on January 17 and 18.

The uniqueness lies in the fact that the Admar Mutt, one of the Ashta Mutts of Krishna Mutt in this Temple town Udupi, ushers in the new Paryaya cycle (32nd). The Paryaya of outgoing seer Vidyadheesha Theertha Swami of Palimaru Mutt, Admar’s dwandwa (associate) mutt, marks the end of the cycle of eight mutts.

Under the system initiated by the Madhwa philosopher and saint Madwacharya, the seers of Ashta mutts would take turns to worship Lord Krishna every two months. Seer Vadiraja (1481-1601) ended the system and introduced the system of f running the temple administration once in two years.

Bengaluru, Jul 4: A case has been filed against a man who posed himself to be the PMO's National Security Council 'youth advisor' during his visit to Bengaluru.

According to the police, Ankit Dey (22 yrs) who had visited Bengaluru between 16 to 20 June and for his stay at ITC Gardenia, posed himself as a youth advisor to National Security Council at PMO.

As per the information given by the hotel staff, the police department had communicated with the PMO. They got clarification that there is no such person designated in the Prime minister's office. A complaint has been filed in Cubbon Park police station.

"The man found to be 22-year-old as per the identity shown in the hotel, left his visiting cards. Although he did not ask for any discount in the hotel," said Police.

A senior police officer said, "A criminal case has been filed against the accuse 'Ankit Dey' under the section IPC 420 (cheating and dishonesty), 465 (forgery), 468 (forgery for purpose of cheating), 471 (using as a genuine forged document), 417 (cheating).

Police have started its work to find him as per the clues we have got. At this point of time, we can not reveal more details," Officer said. 

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.