Drug gangs behind Sri Lanka Easter bombings, reveals President

Bengaluru, Mar 1: Bengaluru Police has rescued six women and arrested two people after a raid on a spa, allegedly operating illegally, in the city's HSR layout area.

"Of the women rescued three are from Thailand and the other three are from North-Eastern states," said a statement from the Central Crime Branch's (CCB) Women Protection Wing.

The raid was carried out on Saturday night and the police have arrested two people, while the owner of the spa is absconding.

The arrested suspects have been identified as Peter Sunawar and Rajkumar Radhakrishna Mishra. Further investigation is underway in the case.

Mangaluru, Apr 16: An old refrigerator has been turned into a "disinfection chamber" by researchers who are striving to come up with solutions to tackle the spread of coronavirus.

Dr Arun M Isloor, head of Chemistry Department, National Institute of Technology Karnataka (NITK), Surathkal, along with research scholar Syed Ibrahim has come up with the device which can disinfect items kept inside it.

"We have named this as ZERO-COV," Dr Isloor said.

He says the device ensures 99.9 per cent destruction of microorganisms present on the surface of items.

"We can keep items like vegetables, currency notes, books or envelopes inside the chamber. Switching on the chamber for 15 minutes ensures 99.9 per cent destruction of microorganisms present in the surface of the items," Dr Isloor added.

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.