Diwali: Karnataka govt limits bursting of crackers from 8 to 10 pm for four days

Mangaluru, May 13: Dakshina Kannada today recorded its fourth death due to novel coronavirus.

The victim, identified by number P-536, is a 58-year-old woman from Boloor area of Manglauru. She was tested covid-19 positive on April 30. 

A patient with TB meningitis, the woman had been treated and discharged from Mangaluru’s First Neuro Hospital, which has emerged as covid-19 hub of coastal Karnataka.

In hospital she had reportedly come in contact with patient No 501 who worked as a sweeper in the same hospital. 

With this death, the number of active covid-19 cases reduced to 16 in Dakshina Kannada. The district has so far reported 34 covid-19 cases including four deaths. 14 have been discharged.

Bengaluru, Apr 18: Hours after announcing that two-wheelers will be allowed to ply and that IT/BT companies can resume operations with 33 per cent strength, Chief Minister B S Yediyurappa on Saturday took a u-turn and rolled them back, citing “public opinion” as the reason. 

Earlier in the day, Yediyurappa announced that, after April 20, there will not be any restriction on the movement of two-wheelers in areas that are not COVID-19 containment zones. Yediyurappa also said that a third of IT/BT employees will be allowed to go to the office after April 20. 

“In the backdrop of public opinion and after discussions with senior officials, it has been decided that the prohibition on two-wheelers will continue throughout the lockdown period,” a statement from the Chief Minister’s Office said. “And in the IT/BT sector, only essential services will be allowed and the work-from-home policy will continue.” 

According to sources, the u-turn came following opposition from Yediyurappa’s Cabinet colleagues. “If I was in the meeting, I’d not have allowed it,” a minister said. Only Home Minister Basavaraj Bommai and Revenue Minister R Ashoka were in the meeting Yediyurappa held earlier in the day. The Opposition also stemmed from the fact that there was no need to make decisions on the lockdown when the Cabinet was scheduled to meet on April 20, sources said. 

The incoordination was apparent on Friday when Deputy Chief Minister CN Ashwath Narayan, the IT/BT minister, said 50 per cent of employees in the sector will be permitted to work while Yediyurappa said this would depend on the number of cases reported in the coming days. 

Other announcements made by Yediyurappa remain unchanged.

“Places, where COVID-19 cases are reported, will be identified as containment zones. In such containment zones, an incident commander will be appointed and given magisterial power. Teams comprising the police and health department officials will oversee the lockdown,” Yediyurappa said. “Lockdown will be much more stringent in these areas and no one will be allowed to step out. Essential supplies will be delivered home.”

According to Bommai, there were 32 containment zones in Bengaluru and ‘hotspots’ have been identified in eight districts.

With an eye on restarting economic activities, the government will allow construction work and industries. “In urban areas, construction work will be allowed to start wherever construction workers have the facility to stay on site,” Yediyurappa said. “The manufacturing sector in rural areas and industrial units located in the special economic zones (SEZ) and townships in urban areas will be allowed to function,” he said.

Stating that inter-state travel will be prohibited, Yediyurappa said the districts of Bengaluru Urban, Bengaluru Rural and Ramnagara will be considered as one only for the movement of industrial workers.

Asked about liquor sale, Yediyurappa said a decision will be taken after May 3. The government has already prohibited liquor sale till April 20 midnight.

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.