UK can keep Kohinoor, India shouldn't reclaim it: Modi govt to Supreme Court

Mysuru, Feb 14: Citing the coronavirus scare prevalent in the city, hotel owners have urged the civic corporation to shut down roadside food vends, calling them a risk to public health.

A team of the city Hotel Owners Association, led by president C Narayanagowda and honorary secretary Ravindra Bhat, met mayor Tasneem Bano and MCC commissioner Gurudatta Hegde on Tuesday and urged them to implement the high court’s ban on street food vending.

In a statement issued on Thursday, the association said it had raised the poor hygiene at such joints amid the coronavirus threat and increasing incidence of chikungunya and malaria in the city. There is no check on the ingredients or water used and the cleanliness of the kitchens and cooking staff, they pointed out. Many of the joints operate near drains and public urinals and don’t have running water for washing or cleaning utensils, they said. Besides, the vends dump unsegregated garbage and compromise pedestrian safety by blocking pavements, they alleged.

“As this involves the livelihood of the vendors, I will take a decision after discussions with the commissioner and elected representatives,” the mayor said while pointing out that MCC had issued identity cards to the vendors after collecting details about them and their stalls. She said the health and education standing committees would also be consulted.

Commissioner Hegde said MCC was planning to move the vendors to designated hawking zones to ensure their livelihood was not affected. He explained that any drive to remove the vends was fraught with law and order problems. “False cases have been filed against MCC officers whenever they conducted drives against footpath food vendors in non-hawking zones. We will consult with the city police commissioner before taking any steps,” he 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.

Bengaluru, Feb 25: A day after Karnataka minister BC Patil felt the need for a law to shoot people who raise pro-Pakistan and anti-India slogans, another BJP MLA on Monday said such people should be shot at sight or exiled to the neighbouring country.

Appachu Ranjan, MLA from Madikeri, said a woman named Amulya had raised Pakistan Zindabad slogan at Bengaluru during a CAA-related meeting.

"People saying Pakistan Zindabad, despite living in our country- eating food and drinking water available here- they should be shot at sight. Or else such people should be exiled to Pakistan, and no one should should show softness towards them and fight cases in their favour," he said at Somwarpet in Kodagu.

Amulya Leona, a woman who raised pro-Pakistan slogans at an anti-Citizenship Amendment Act rally in Bengaluru on Thursday, has been booked for sedition and remanded to judicial custody.

She had raised "Pakistan Zindabad" slogans thrice after the organisers, under the banner of "Save the Constitution", invited her to address the gathering in the presence of All India Majlis-e-Ittehadul Muslimeen (AIMIM) chief Asaduddin Owaisi.

Agriculture minister Patil on Sunday had expressed the need for a legislation to shoot such people, and said he would make a request to the prime minister in this regard. "A law should be brought in the country that who ever raises slogans against India and in favour of Pakistan, they should be shot at sight. Bringing such a law is important," Patil had said.