Mangaluru: Man gets 7 years jail for raping 17-year-old daughter

Bengaluru, Apr 24: Karnataka Chief Minister BS Yediyurappa on Thursday held a meeting with state officials to address the situation in the wake of COVID-19 pandemic.

Due to COVID-19, the prices of the crops have come down. It was instructed to buy those vegetables and keep them in cold storage and then sell. It was also instructed to export fruits, vegetables which cannot be kept for a long time to other states and countries.

Wherever there is a scarcity of drinking water, it was decided to supply water immediately.
Chief Minister Yediyurappa had earlier spoken to Union Minister Sadananda Gowda and took information regarding fertilisers.

As fertilisers' demand is less in the international market, the Union minister for fertilisers said that farmers will be given fertilisers at less than the actual price.

As some of the associations/guilds have violated the lease conditions by not starting the actual work which they have got the land for in Bengaluru, they have been instructed to return the land to the government where the lease conditions have been violated.

As far as the irrigation department is concerned, much water is stored in dams. It was decided to utilise the same for the cultivation of crops and for the purpose of drinking.

As far as the education department is concerned, it was instructed to give online training to students.

With the help of state television channel Doordarshan, it has been decided to teach students about the syllabus and other activities till the reopening of school.

The KSRTC has lost hundreds of crore due to the reduction in bus services due to COVID-19. So, they were instructed to use buses to transport goods to generate revenue.

The government also decided that salary for the doctors, who are working on a contract basis against COVID-19, will be increased significantly.

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.