Mangaluru Mayor clinches gold at national karate championship

Mangaluru, May 28: A pregnant woman who returned from Dubai in a repatriation flight suffered miscarriage after she was allegedly denied entry to her apartment flat and also refused proper treatment in the institutional quarantine.

Fathima was put in a paid quarantine facility after she returned on May 12 flight for her first delivery.

On the second day of her return, she tested negative for Covid-19 in the first test. As per SOP (Standard operating procedures) for pregnant women, she was ready to shift to her apartment, Shivdeep Residency, located at Shivbhag in the city for home quarantine.

However, the members of the Resident Welfare Association of the apartment who got a whiff of her arrival, called an emergency meeting the previous night and reportedly informed the pregnant woman that her entry to the flat would put other residents in trouble and suggested that she stay away.

Sources said the RWA consists of some serving and retired police officials.

With no other go, the woman continued in the paid quarantine.

Treatment for a pregnant woman?

Fathima's father-in-law Azeez Bastikar said the doctors who attended her during the quarantine did not provide proper healthcare required for a pregnant woman and also refused to touch her, out of fear.

Many a time, they did not even check her BP, saying that they ‘forgot to bring the kit’. When her situation worsened, the family members contacted several hospitals in the city but all of them allegedly refused to admit her, fearing the sealing down of the hospital in case she tests positive on the 14th day COVID test.

Finally, the six and half months pregnant woman was shifted to a clinic on Wednesday after her 14th day test had turned negative.

The doctors who checked her found out that she had suffered a miscarriage and operated on her to remove the stillborn. The doctors said further delay would have costed the woman her life.

Meanwhile, on Thursday, Azeez Bastikar approached Deputy Commissioner Sindhu B Rupesh, seeking action against the doctors and hospitals who denied treatment and the RWA who refused her entry to the apartment.

Stating that the ill-treatment meted out to her daughter-in-law by doctors and others added to her trauma resulting in the miscarriage, he appealed to the authorities to ensure that no one else is treated in a similar manner.

He said that Fathima and her husband live in Dubai and that she came to India for a safe delivery as the situation was critical in Dubai.

The paid quarantine facility where she had to continue after RWA denied her access, charged her Rs 60,000 for her stay.

Meanwhile, the MCC commissioner Ajith Kumar Hegde on Thursday issued a notice to Shivdeep Apartment for refusing Fathima's entry.

The apartment has to respond within three days, failing which legal action will be initiated against it.

Davanagere, Jul 4: Referring to allegations made by former Karnataka Chief Minister Siddaramaiah's charge about corruption while purchasing COVID-19 equipment, Health Minister B Sriramulu said the state government is ready for any kind of probe in this regard.

Speaking to media persons here on Saturday, he said the government has maintained accounts for each purchase of equipment related to Covid-19. 

"So, Congress leader's allegations are far from the truth. Siddaramaiah has vast political experience. It is unbecoming of such a leader to make ridiculous allegations. The government is ready to release white paper on purchase of equipment related to Covid-19," he said.

He said Karnataka stands third in the country in collection of throat swabs and examination of people related to Covid-19. The entire country has hailed Karnataka's role in containing Covid-19, Sriramulu he added.

Bengaluru, Feb 19: Pointing out that there was a deliberate attempt to cover up police excesses by implicating innocent persons at whim, the Karnataka High Court on Tuesday granted conditional bail to 21 people who were accused by police of involving in violence during the protests against the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) in Mangaluru.

Allowing the bail petitions of Ashik and 20 others from Udupi and Dakshina Kannada districts, Justice John Michael Cunha said the overzealousness of the police is also evident from the fact that FIRs were registered under Section 307 of IPC against the persons killed by the police themselves.

“In an offence involving a large number of people, the identity and participation of each accused must be fixed with reasonable certainty. In the present cases, the identity appears to have been fixed on the basis of their affiliation to PFI and they being members of the Muslim community. Though it is stated that the involvement of the petitioners is captured in CCTV footage and photographs, no such material is produced before the court showing the presence of any of the petitioners at the spot, armed with deadly weapons,” the judge noted.

In the statement of objections filed by the State Public Prosecutor-I, it was stated that there was a hint of Muslim youths holding protest on December 19, 2019, opposing the implementation of CAA. Prohibitory orders were clamped in that connection. This assertion indicated that the common object of the assembly was to oppose the implementation of CAA and National Register for Citizens (NRC) which, by itself, was not an “unlawful object”, the judge pointed out.

‘Pics show cops throwing stones at crowd’

Justice Cunha also said the material collected by the investigators did not contain any specific evidence regarding the presence of any of the petitioners at the spot. On the other hand, omnibus allegations were made against the Muslim crowd of 1,500-2,000, alleging that they were armed with weapons like stones, soda bottles and glass pieces. The photographs produced by the SPP depicted that hardly any member of the crowd were armed with weapons, except one of them holding a bottle. In none of these photographs, police station or policemen were seen in the vicinity, the judge noted.

“On the other hand, photographs produced by the petitioners show that the policemen themselves were pelting stones at the crowd. The petitioners have produced copies of the complaints lodged by the dependants of the deceased who died due to police firing and the endorsement made thereon reveals that even though the law required the police to register independent FIRs in view of the specific complaint made against the police officers making out cognizable offences, the police have failed to register FIRs. This goes to show that a deliberate attempt is underway to cover up police excesses by implicating innocent persons at the whims and caprice of the police,” the judge observed.

In the wake of counter-allegations against the police and in the backdrop of their failure to register FIRs based on complaints lodged by the families of victims, the possibility of false and mistaken implication could not be ruled out, the judge said. In these circumstances, it would be a travesty of justice to deny bail to the petitioners and sacrifice their liberties to the mercy of the district administration and police. The records indicate that a deliberate attempt has been made to trump up evidence and to deprive the liberties of the petitioners by fabricating evidence. None of the petitioners have any criminal antecedents, the court said.

“The allegations levelled against the petitioners are not punishable with death or imprisonment for life. There is no direct evidence to connect them with the alleged offence. The investigation appears to be malafide and partisan. In the circumstances, in order to protect the rights and liberties of the petitioners, it is necessary to admit them to bail,” the judge said.

The petitioners were arrested and remanded in judicial custody after the anti-CAA protests on charges of being members of an unlawful assembly, armed with lethal weapons, attempting to set fire to the North Police Station in Mangaluru, obstructing the police from discharging their duties and causing damage to public property, etc., on December 19 in violation of the prohibitory orders. They moved the High Court as their bail pleas had been rejected by a sessions court in Dakshina Kannada.