Sabarimala Row: Hurling of bombs, setting ablaze party offices continue in Kerala

Mangaluru, May 29: Even as the thousands of Indian expatriates in Saudi Arabia are waiting for repatriation flights to return to India, a few NRI entrepreneurs are sending home their employees through chartered flights. 

The government of India on May 21 had formally approved the repatriation of stranded Indian expatriate workers through chartered flights arranged by their employing companies particularly in Gulf region and elsewhere. 

Expertise Contracting Co. Ltd headed by K S Sheik and Al-Muzain Est. headed by Zakaria Jokatte are among those who have hired charter flights to repatriate hundreds of employees to India amidst corona lockdown. 

Mr Sheik said that his firm had applied for nine charter flights. "Two of the charter flights will carry 360 people to Mangaluru. Seven other flights will repatriate employees to Delhi, Thiruvananthapuram, Chennai and Hyderabad," he said, adding that the company will bear complete expense of their repatriation and quarantine facility after India. 

Mr Jokatte three charter flights will fly from Dammam to Mangaluru International Airport on June 2, 5 and 8 carrying their employees.

Belagavi, Feb 10: In comments that raised eyebrows, Ramesh Jarkiholi, who quit the Congress and joined the BJP and who took oath as minister last week, said his brother Satish has a bright future. The two siblings have rarely seen eye-to-eye — at least in public — in recent times.

He also trained his gun on Congress leader DK Shivakumar, sarcastically thanking the Congress MLA for his meteoric rise. “Had Shivakumar not stood against me, I would not have emerged as a tall leader in the state. I must thank him,” Ramesh said.

The Gokak MLA said Satish of the Congress, the most politically-savvy of the five Jarkiholi siblings, would reach “the top” in his political career. However, he advised him “to inculcate patience and adopt strategies”. “He should make his moves at the right time as timing is very important in politics,” Ramesh said.

He also urged Satish to keep his supporters happy. “Many of his followers are disappointed with his leadership because he does not extend a helping hand to his own people. In the present political climate, people do not endorse a leader who only talks about Buddha and Basava,” Ramesh said.

Ramesh took a dig at Lakan, the youngest sibling, saying, “Lakan speaks ill about me most of the time. He does not understand much. But we brothers are one when it comes to family. We are united when it comes to family matters, but when it comes to politics, we are at loggerheads.”

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.