Rohini moves HC, says mining mafia behind her transfer

Mangaluru, June 27: The district health authorities are likely to conduct mass random testing for Covid-19 in Ullal town on the outskirts of the city in the wake of detection of several new coronavirus positive cases there in past couple few days.  

An elderly woman from Azad Nagar in Ullal was died of coronavirus earlier this week. Many others including a couple of policemen also tested positive for the deadly virus in vicinity.

Following this, local elected representatives including MLA U T Khader and religious leaders of Ullal held a meeting regarding taking steps to control the spread of the virus. In the meeting Mr Khader suggested the authorities to conduct random testing in Ullal town. 

Apart from Azad Nagar, covid-19 cases have surfaced in Kodi, Bangera Lane and in the surroundings of police station and Sahara Hospital triggering panic among people. Hence, the authorities are like to conduct random testing of auto rickshaw drivers, fishermen, street vendors among others. 

Meanwhile, several mosques in Ullal have reportedly decided to suspend congregational prayers temporarily.

Bengaluru, Jun 30: To instill confidence among its commuters, the Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation (KSRTC) has decided to put stamp on hand of all passengers before they are allowed to board the buses.

In a statement issued here on Tuesday, The decision was taken in the wake of a sudden jump in the number of COVID-19 cases reported from Bengaluru.

The round stamp is, however, different from 'home-quarantine' stamp applied to infected and they were not allowed to travel. Officials said that the measure is aimed at reassuring passengers that those travelling with them do not have symptoms. The left hand will be stamped with an ink which can be washed away by the time they reach home.

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.