DKS mentions religion of Siddaganga seer’s doctor, later says sorry

Bengaluru, May 28: The Karnataka government has done away with previously mandatory COVID-19 testing for asymptomatic international travellers. 

The development comes a day after the government issued a circular, which allowed placing of international travellers into home quarantine if they had completed seven days of institutional quarantine.

A circular signed by Jawaid Akhtar, Additional Chief Secretary to the State Government, dated May 27, says that any “person who has completed seven days of institutional quarantine and is asymptomatic can be permitted for home quarantine with a COVID-19 test (RT-PCR), subject to undergoing a medical check-up.”

This check-up equates to thermal screening (with a required temperature of under 37.5C or 99.5F and pulse oximetry of under 94%). 

The circular added that all elderly people, over the age of 60, and those with comorbidities (such as Diabetes mellitus, hypertension, asthma, heart ailment, renal disease...etc) are “required to be clinically evaluated diligently prior to shifting them for quarantine.”

On Wednesday, Pankaj Pandey, Commissioner, the Department of Health and Family Welfare said that these new guidelines were based on recommendations from the COVID Task Force. A member of the COVID Task Force said that new strategies had been formulated based on the latest findings on how the SARS-Cov-2 virus affects people.

Udupi, Jun 20: The wife and daughter of a 54-year-old man who succumbed to Covid-19, tested positive for the virus on Saturday.

Sources said that the family returned to Udupi on June 18 and the man died the same day while his wife and daughter tested positive today.

The man and his family had arrived at their house in Thekkatte on Thursday, June 18 afternoon. Later in the day, the man died. He was suffering from jaundice and had arrived from Mumbai in the state of illness.

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.