Hidden camera at women's toilet: M.Sc. student Santosh M arrested

Bengaluru, Jun 5: A COVID-19 patient, who was admitted to Victoria hospital, has recovered from the disease after he was administered convalescent plasma therapy.

He is the second patient in the state who has recovered from COVID-19 after the therapy.

"I am happy to inform the second plasma therapy patient has recovered and shifted out of ICU. This middle-aged patient was admitted in Victoria hospital ICU with severe COVID-19 illness and was also diabetic with poor sugar control," Dr Vishal Rao, HCG Hospital Bengaluru said.

"The patient received convalescent plasma on May 27, since then there was steady improvement in patient's condition and was taken off high flow nasal oxygen on June 2, 2020, and is at present on a minimal oxygen, shifted toward yesterday. With the rapid recovery we hope to discharge the patient soon," he said.

Speaking further, Rao said: "This is a significant improvement and reassuring. We hope to see him recover completely and will closely monitor the condition going forward to send the patient from ward to home."

In Karnataka, 4,320 coronavirus cases have been reported including 1,610 cured/discharged/migrated and 57 deaths, according to the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare. 

Mangaluru, May 15: The second evacuation flight from Dubai to Mangaluru is expected to bring nearly 180 stranded UAE Kannadigas on May 18.

Air India Express B737-800NG aircraft will take off from terminal 2 of Dubai International Airport at 1.30 pm UAE time and land in Mangaluru International Airport at 6.30 pm local time, sources said.

Mangaluru Airport had witnessed chaos when the first repatriation flight arrived on May 12. Now many passengers of the first flight tested positive for the covid-19.

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.