EC issues show cause notice to Sakshi Maharaj

Mangaluru, Jan 26: A 55-year-old man has been arrested for allegedly attacking his sister-in-law and her daughter with acid used to make rubber sheets in Dakshina Kannada district of Karnataka, police said on Saturday.

The victim, a 35-year-old widow with three daughters, has been admitted to the government Wenlock Hospital here with severe burns. Her daughter, who suffered minor injuries, is also hospitalised.

In her complaint, the woman said her late husband's elder brother came to her house on Thursday, abused her in foul language before opening an acid bottle and throwing its contents at her through the window.

The woman suffered burn injuries on her face, neck and shoulders and her daughter on her legs and hands.

The victim's husband had taken a loan of Rs 5 lakh from a cooperative bank but died in 2018 after paying only two instalments and the woman could not repay it further.

The bank's notices kept coming to the elder sibling's address, which infuriated him. There was also a long-pending land dispute between the two, sources said.

Based on the woman's complaint, a case was registered on Friday and the man arrested soon after. Kadaba sub-inspector police Rukma Naik visited Wenlock

Hospital to record the woman's statement, police added.

Mangaluru, May 8: Migrant workers, stranded in Karnataka due to lockdown, staged a protest on Friday at the Central Railway Station here, demanding to be sent back to their respective native places.

The workers demanded the state government to take measures and send them back to their homes.

Maintaining social distancing and covering their faces with masks, the workers were holding placards which read -- "We want to go home Jharkhand, We want justice and we want to go home."

They appealed to the state government to arrange trains and buses to ferry them to their native places and threatened to walk home if denied transport.

Several protests have erupted in different parts of the country, such as Andhra Pradesh and Kerala, as stranded labourers took to the roads demanding to be sent back home.

The Ministry of Home Affairs on May 1 had issued an order to extend the ongoing lockdown by two more weeks from May 4 with some relaxations.

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.