Dad advised me on how to take Karnataka on the path of development: HDK

Bengaluru, Jun 12: All the four candidates, including former prime minister H D Deve Gowda (JDS), and senior Congress leader Mallikarjna Kharge, on Friday were declared elected unopposed to the Rajya Sabha from Karnataka.

Karnataka Assembly Secretary sources here said that all the four candidates, who were in the fray for as many berths, were elected after the last date of withdrawal of candidature ended on Friday.

Thiruvananthapuram, Feb 17: Out of the total 418 samples of suspect coronavirus cases sent for testing to National Institute of Virology from Kerala, 405 have come out as negative, while the results for the rest, barring three, are awaited.

"Out of three persons in whom the disease was confirmed, two persons have been discharged. One person is stable and the repeat sample results are awaited," according to a release by the Health and Family Welfare Department of the Kerala government.

The release added that till Sunday a total of 2,276 people have been placed under surveillance, "out of which 2262 are under home isolation and 14 are admitted in designated isolation facilities."

The health condition of all symptomatic people under isolation is stable, according to the release.

The release added that the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare (Centre) has informed the Kerala government that 115 people belonging to Kerala are currently in quarantine in two camps in Delhi.

These 115 people have been tested and found negative for coronavirus and they will be allowed to travel back to Kerala on Monday evening.

The people have been requested to remain in home isolation upon their return.

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.