Baba Parmanand arrested for sexual exploitation; porn videos seized

Bengaluru, Jul 1: Eighteen private hospitals here have been slapped with a show-cause notice after a 52-year old patient with influenza-like illness symptoms died here on being allegedly denied admission by them citing "non- availability" of beds. 

Health Minister B Sriramulu on Wednesdy said refusal to provide treatment was not only inhuman but also illegal as he tagged a copy of the notice in a tweet. 

"Notice has been served to the hospitals taking cognisance of the (media) reports about the denial of admission to a patient in emergency. Denying medical assistance during emergency is not only inhuman but also illegal," he tweeted. According to a report, the son and nephew of the patient took him to the 18 hospitals on Saturday and Sunday but he was not admitted on the pretext of non-availability of beds or ventilators. 

The man died later. The Commissioner of Health and Family Welfare issued the show-cause notice to the top authorities of the hospitals under the Karnataka Private Medical Establishment (KPME) Act, 2007. 

"By denying admission to the patient, your hospitals have violated the provisions of the KPME Act. You are liable for legal action," the notice said, seeking replies within 24 hours as to why action should not be against the hospitals. 

This was a "clear violation" of providing medical assistance and admission necessitated under the agreed provision of the KPME registration. Private medical establishments cannot refuse or avoid treatment to patients suffering from COVID-19 or having symptoms, the common notice added. 

The incident comes in the backdop of repeated instructions by the government that hospitals cannot deny admission to the patients suffering from coronavirus or having symptoms.

Mangaluru, Jul 5: A COVID-19 patient escaped from a hospital in Mangaluru on Sunday, Mangaluru Commissioner of Police Vikas Kumar.

A total of 1,925 cases of COVID-19 and 37 deaths recorded in Karnataka in the last 24 hours, taking the total number of cases to 23,474.

The health department informed that the death toll rose to 372 while active cases stood at 13,251 in the state.

According to the Union Health Ministry, India has recorded 6,73,165 numbers of COVID-19 cases and 19,268 deaths. 

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.