Mangaluru: Three Sri Ram Sena activists arrested for attack on school

Mangaluru, Apr 6: Three more COVID-19 positive cases in the Dakshina Kannada district have been recovered and discharged on Monday.

All three are Kasargod residents and were being treated in the city’s Wenlock hospital.

A 22-year-old man Bhatkal was discharged on Monday after recovering fully from the infection.

A total of 12 cases have been found COVID-19 positive in Mangaluru till now, said B Rupesh, Deputy Commissioner and District Magistrate's Office, Dakshina Kannada, on Monday.

"So far, 4 positive cases have recovered in Mangaluru, of which 3 COVID-19 positive patients have recovered and have been discharged today," said Rupesh.

He further said, "A total of 12 positive cases have been reported in the city till now."

As per the latest update by the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, the total number of confirmed cases in the country is 4281. 151 cases are from Karnataka.

Mangaluru, Jan 2: Shwetha Rasquinha, Assistant Professor and Head of the Department of Social Work, St Aloysius College, Mangaluru, has been awarded Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) degree by the Mangalore University for her thesis titled “Effectiveness of Social work intervention on caretakers of cancer patients- A social work study in Mangalore”.

She did her studies under the guidance of Dr Rameela Shekhar, Professor (Rtd), School of Social work, Roshni Nilaya, Mangaluru.

Ms Shwetha Rasquinha hails from Vittal, D/o Vincent Rasquinha and Late Regina Rasquinha, and is the second person to complete doctoral studies from the Vittal Parish.

Her colleagues and well-wishers have congratulated her for her highest achievement in academics and successful completion of quality research.

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.