Godhra tragedy: Guj HC reduces death sentence of 11 to life term

New Delhi, Jan 31: Nirbhaya's mother Asha Devi on Friday said she will continue her fight till the convicts in the 2012 gangrape and murder case are hanged, shortly after a Delhi court postponed the execution of death warrants till further order.

Devi told reporters her "hopes are dashed" but she will continue her fight.

"These convicts have no right to live. We keep getting disappointed by the system. I will continue my fight till the convicts are hanged," she said.

A Delhi court postponed the execution of death warrants of the four convicts in the Nirbhaya gangrape and murder case till further order.

Additional sessions judge Dharmender Rana passed the order on a plea by the convicts seeking a stay on their execution on Saturday, February 1.

Devi said because of the loopholes in law the "criminals' lawyers had the audacity to challenge me in court that they will not be hanged".

The black warrants for execution of the death sentence against Pawan Gupta, Vinay Kumar Sharma, Akshay Kumar and Mukesh Kumar Singh, were issued on January 17.

A 23-year-old physiotherapy intern who came to be known as "Nirbhaya" (the fearless one) was gangraped and savagely assaulted on the night of December 16, 2012, in a moving bus in South Delhi. She died of her injuries a fortnight later in a Singapore hospital.

Bengaluru, Mar 28: Karnataka Deputy Chief Minister Govind Karjol on Ssturday said the coronavirus epidemic has reached the third phase and cautioned people defying the lockdown orders.

"Today the coronavirus epidemic has entered the third phase. By and large people are cooperating," he told reporters at Bagalkote.

The deputy chief minister said there were some people defying the lockdown orders by roaming in groups without wearing masks.

He said he has directed the district authorities to take stringent action against them.

Karjol also said the government has taken adequate measures for the treatment and prevention of this disease.

Steps have been taken for door-to-door supply of grocery items in Bagalkote, he 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.