Mangaluru city police launches dedicated web portal, mobile app

Bengaluru, Apr 30: Chief Minister B S Yediyurappa, has directed the Bengaluru City Police to return all the vehicles, which were seized during the Coronavirus Lockdown period, for having flouted rules.

The City Police Commissioner, Bhaskar Rao, informed that it was decided to return the seized vehicles to the owners, after verifying documents.

He said that the vehicles had been seized while enforcing strict guidelines, issued to prevent the spread of the COVID-19 virus, in the city.

Bengaluru, Apr 21: The Karnataka Government may spare its employees from salary cuts this month despite severe resources crunch it faces following steep fall in revenue collection due to the ongoing lockdown to fight the coronavirus, official sources said on Tuesday.

As of now, there is no problem with April salary and we can manage. But if May also turns out to be a wash-out (in terms of revenue collection), then the situation is going to be very tough, a senior Minister said.

Ministers and members of Karnataka Legislature are taking a 30 per cent pay-cut for a year from April 1 this year. Opposition Congress in the state has vehemently opposed any possible move to cut salaries of government employees.

You just cant even imagine, the Chief Minister B S Yediyurappa had told news agency in an interview earlier this month on the economic impact of the lock-down on the state's finances. Yediyurappa had also said that the government is now not in a position to implement Budget proposals, barring important ones, with all kinds of revenue collections having completely stopped following the lockdown.

The government recently said it proposes to regularise unauthorised properties in the state by imposing penalty, and also auction more than 12,000 corner sites belonging to the Bengaluru Development Authority, as part of resource mobilisation drive.

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.