Complaint filed against Pratap Simha for insulating Kargil martyr’s daughter

Mangaluru, Mar 25: A full-fledged control room was set up at the Deputy Commissioner's office in Mangaluru to collect all information about the suspected patients.  

The control room will function under the guidance of KIADB special land acquisition officer.  

All the details on those who arrived from foreign countries via Mangalore Airport, via airports in other districts, primary and secondary contacts of the people who arrived from foreign countries are being compiled at the control room.

Bengaluru, Jun 7: Fatalities due to coronavirus reached 61 in Karnataka with two more deaths, while 239 more tested positive for the viral infection, pushing the tally in the state to 5,452, the health department said on Sunday.

The total COVID-19 cases in the state include 2,132 discharges, 3,257 active cases and 61 deaths. A 61-year-old woman suffering from hypothyroidism and was diagnosed with Severe Acute Respiratory Illness (SARI) died on Saturday whereas a 57-year-old man having filariasis and chronic nyeloid leukemia died on Sunday in Bengaluru.

Most of those who contributed for Sunday's new cases were interstate passengers. 183 passengers, most of whom returned from Maharashtra were tested positive for the virus, the health bulletin said.

According to the health department, 39 coronavirus positive cases were reported in Kalaburagi and Yadagiri, 38 in Belagavi, 23 in Bengaluru urban, 17 each in Dakshina Kannada and Davangere, 13 in Udupi, 12 in Shivamogga, nine in Vijayapura, seven in Bidar, six in Ballari, five each in Bengaluru Rural and Hassan, three in Dharwad, two each in Gadag and Uttara Kannada and one each in Mandya and Raichur.

India today reported the highest single-day spike of 9,971 new Covid-19 cases and 287 deaths in the last 24 hours, taking the total number of cases in the country to 2,46,628

.

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.