Shiv Sena newspaper office attacked after cartoon 'mocks' Maratha protests

A pregnant elephant in Kerala ate a pineapple, which was filled with country-made bombs or dynamites. It led to a painful death as the elephant was pregnant and died standing in the Velliyar River in Palakkad in Kerala. People are venting out their anger and concerns all over social media about the gruesome incident.

Yesterday, it was reported that the pregnant elephant was killed after locals allegedly fed her a pineapple stuffed with crackers.

However, when International Business Times, India, reached out to Dr Ab Qayoom, who is an Indian Forest Service Officer, for his comments about what actually must have happened, we got to know that no one have fed the pineapple to the elephant.

Snares used for keeping animals away

Dr Qayoom stated that pineapples filled with firecrackers are used as a snare for catching wild boars. He said, "No one would have fed the pineapple to the elephant. The animal must have found it lying somewhere and must have consumed it herself not knowing what lies ahead for her."

He also stated a second possibility. He said, "Some people actually do such insane things as they consider wild animals as a threat to their property and life. Such incidents do happen at places where wild animals create problems for human beings."

Snares are often found around farms, coffee plantations

He added that wild boars often spoil crops and people use snares as a way to protect their farms and crops. This year, it was reported that the government would soon permit farmers with licensed firearms to shoot wild boars that wander into their lands. The problem is that people do not limit their snares to only wild boars and there have been several incidents when tigers, leopards and other animals have fallen prey to these haphazardly placed snares around farms, coffee farms and wildlife corridors.

Elephant kept standing in water before dying

The pregnant wild elephant originally belonged to Silent Valley National Park (SVNP), Palakkad. As the elephant died, she remained calm despite being in excruciating pain. The elephant kept standing and died at Velliyar River, Malappuram, with its trunk in the water.

The elephant was 15-years-old and was probably getting some relief as it stood in the water after her tongue and mouth exploded. Mohan Krishnan, Section Forest Officer, Nilambur, shared the sad incident on his Facebook page where he had acted as the Rapid Response Team official to rescue the elephant, which was in distress.

When a postmortem examination was carried out, it was learnt that the reason for the elephant's death was due to asphyxia where water had got into her lungs and trachea. Dr David Abraham, Assistant Forest Veterinary Officer, Thrissur, carried out the postmortem.

Dr David said, "I have so far done more than 250 postmortems of elephants alone in my more than two decades career. But this was the first time I was so moved as I could hold the foetus of the baby in my hands. Initially, none of us was aware that the elephant was pregnant. After seeing her heart, I spotted the amniotic fluid and realized that she was pregnant."

Claim reviewed :

Fact checking Palakkad elephant death

Claimed By :

Twitter, Facebook and Youtube posts.

Fact Check :

False

https://t.co/uR4p7rDUli

Udupi, Jun 16: A young software engineer died on board a bus bound for Udupi’s Kundapura from Bengaluru due to suspected cardiac arrest this morning.

The deceased has been identified as Chaitanya (25), son of Vishnu Murthy, a resident of Kumbri in Koteshwar in Kundapura taluk. He was working for a software firm Bengaluru.

Chaitanya had boarded a ‘Durgamba’ bus from Bengaluru at 9 pm on June 15. At around 6.30 am on June 16, he called his father and informed that the bus had reached Barkur.

When his father called Chaitanya again at around 7.30 am, the bus driver answered the call and told him that his son had fallen ill and been taken to Vinaya hospital in Kundapur.

Vishnu Murthy rushed to the hospital, but was informed by the doctors that Chaitanya was declared brought dead.

A case has been registered at Kundapura police station. Even though it is suspected that he died of cardiac arrest, the exact cause will be known only after the post-mortem.

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.