Drag-racing kills teenager, injures his 2 friends

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.

Bengaluru, Jun 20: Nine candidates filed their nominations for the June 29 elections to seven seats of the Karnataka legislative council on Thursday.

While the BJP has fielded four candidates, the Congress has given tickets to two and the JD(S) to one candidate respectively for the biennial elections to seven seats of the legislative council to be elected by the MLAs.

One independent and one person claiming to be affiliated to BJP have also filed their nomination papers at the office of Legislative Assembly Secretary MK Vishalakshi, who is also the returning officer for the polls.

"The nominations of two candidates without any proposers is likely to be rejected during scrutiny of the papers on Friday. So seven candidates will be in the fray for as many berths. Hence the election is likely to be unopposed if no one withdraws nominations," official sources said.

While scrutiny will take place, Friday, June 22 is the last date for withdrawal of candidature.

The election is necessitated as the term of seven MLCs — Naseer Ahmed, Jayamma, M C Venugopal, N S Bose Raju, H M Revanna (all Congress), T A Sharavana (JD(S)) and independent D U Mallikarjuna — will end June 30.

Based on their strength in the Assembly, while BJP is in a position to win four out of seven seats, Congress can win two and JD(S) one.

Twenty-eight valid votes of MLAs are required for each candidate to win.

Four BJP candidates MTB Nagaraj, R Shankar, Sunil Vallyapure and Pratap Simha Nayak filed their nominations today, after the party high command announced their names late on Wednesday.

Nagaraj and Shankar had played a key role in the formation of the BJP government after the coup that led to the collapse of Congress-JD(S) coalition.They had subsequently defected to the saffron party.

While Nagaraj lost the bye-elections held later, Shankar did not contest in exchange for a Council berth promise.

Among the other BJP candidates, Vallyapure is a former MLA from Chincholi and had given up his seat abiding by the party decision to field Avinash Jadhav, while Nayak is a senior party worker and had served as Dakshina Kannada district president.

A BJP insider said Shankar and Vallyapure have been given MLC tickets as they had given up their Assembly seats, while Nagraj was considered as he had faced a defeat during the bypolls because party MP B N Bachhe Gowda's son Sharath contested as a rebel.

Nayak's candidature is being seen as BJP high command's choice by party insiders, ignoring the state units recommendation of AH Vishwanath, a former JD(S) MLA who had defected to BJP.

Two Congress candidates, senior party leader BK Hariprasad and incumbent Naseer Ahmed also filed their nominations today.

Hariprasad's name was announced by the party on Wednesday, even as his tenure in Rajya Sabha is to end on June 25.

Naseer Ahmed, who is retiring as MLC on June 30 is seeking another term.

The choice of candidates by the Congress high command is being seen as a mixed bag for CLP leader Siddaramaiah as Naseer Ahmed is said to be close to him, while Hariprasad is considered among his adversaries.

In a surprise move, JD(S) has fielded Govinda Raju from Kolar as the party candidate for the MLC polls.

Incumbent MLC T A Sharavana and outgoing Rajya Sabha member Kupendra Reddy were seen as the prime aspirants for the ticket.

JD(S) leader and former Chief Minister H D Kumaraswamy said Govinda Raju was chosen as it would help organise and strengthen the party in Kolar and Chikkaballapura region.

The independent candidate who has filed his papers today is P C Krishnegowda, and the one who filed his nomination claiming to be associated with BJP is Mandikkal Nagaraja.

New Delhi, Jan 14: The Kerala government has challenged the new Citizenship (Amendment) Act (CAA) before the Supreme Court, becoming the first state to do so amid nationwide protests against the religion-based citizenship law. The Supreme Court is already hearing over 60 petitions against the law.

Kerala's Left-led government in its petition calls the CAA a violation of several articles of the constitution including the right to equality and says the law goes against the basic principle of secularism in the constitution.

The Kerala government has also challenged the validity of changes made in 2015 to the Passport law and the Foreigners (Amendment) Order, regularising the stay of non-Muslim migrants from Pakistan, Bangladesh and Afghanistan who had entered India before 2015.

The Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA), eases the path for non-Muslims in the neighbouring Muslim-majority nations of Pakistan, Afghanistan and Bangladesh to become Indian citizens. Critics fear that the CAA, along with a proposed National Register of Citizens (NRC), will discriminate against Muslims.

The Kerala petition says the CAA violates Articles 14, 21 and 25 of the constitution.

While Article 14 is about the right to equality, Article 21 says "no person will be deprived of life or personal liberty except according to a procedure established by law". Under Article 25, "all persons are equally entitled to freedom of conscience."

Several non-BJP governments have refused to carry out the NRC in an attempt to stave off the enforcement of the citizenship law.

Over 60 writ petitions have been filed in Supreme Court so far against the Citizenship (Amendment) Act. Various political parties, NGOs and also MPs have challenged the law.

The Supreme Court will hear the petitions on January 22.

During the last hearing, petitioners didn't ask that the law be put on hold as the CAA was not in force. The Act has, however, come into force from January 10 through a home ministry notification.