HC tells police to act against illegal slaughterhouses

Tumakuru, Jan 2: Prime Minister Narendra Modi on Thursday paid respects to the 'Gadduge' (final resting place) of Shivakumara Swamiji at Siddaganga Math, a prominent Lingayat seminary here, and said the Swamiji's work would continue to inspire everyone.

The Swamiji, who was known as the 'Walking God' among his countless followers, had passed away last year at the age of 111. The Prime Minister, who arrived at the Yelahanka Airbase in Bengaluru, went directly to Tumakuru, where the Math is located, by a chopper along with Chief Minister B S Yediyurappa, Union Minister Pralhad Joshi and former Chief Minister D V Sadananda Gowda among others. Modi, after offering respects to the 'Gadduge', planted Bilva plant (Aegle marmelos) on the premises of the Math and also laid the foundation for the construction of a museum dedicated to Swamiji here before addressing the gathering, largely comprising students. Speaking on the occasion, Modi said he was feeling blessed to begin 2020 from the sacred land of Siddaganga, but at the same time was feeling the "vacuum" in the absence of Shivakumara Swamiji. "It is rare see the number of people swamiji had inspired during his life time. I'm really fortunate to lay the foundation for the museum in swamiji's memory. Through this museum, his works will continue to inspire generations," he said. Also, Prime Minister remembered Vishwesha Theertha of Udupi's Pejawar Math who passed away recently. Yediyurappa and the present pontiff of the Math Siddalinga Swamiji were among the others present. Known as "trivida dasohi" for his triple sacraments - food, shelter and education - among his followers, Shivakumara swamiji was considered as the incarnation of Basavanna, the 12th-century social reformer, as he accepted all irrespective of their religion or caste. There has been a growing clamour from people of different walks of life, including politicians, for conferring "Bharat Ratna" on the late Swamiji.

After the Swamiji's demise, the then Chief Minister H D Kumaraswamy had written to Modi urging him to confer the country's highest civilian order on the late seer.

Opposition Congress on Thursday questioned the Prime Minister about not conferring the"Bharat Ratna" on Shivakumara Swamiji.

Questioning Modi as to why he did not visit Tumakuru when Shivakumara Swamiji of Siddaganga Math passed away, the principal opposition party in the state assembly in a tweet also sought to know why the seer was not conferred with the Bharat Ratna yet, while pointing out that former Chief Minister Siddaramaiah had written a letter in this regard in January 2018.

The present seer of the seminary Siddalinga Swamiji presented Modi a silver statue of Shivakumara Swamiji as a memento.

 Bengaluru, Jan 12: Two pilgrims from Bengaluru, who were siblings, drowned in sea off Auro Beach in Puducherry today.

The deceased have been identified as V Gauthman, 22, and his brother Vivek, 20.

Gauthman and Vivek were among a group of around 150 devotees from Bengaluru to the Adhiparasakhi temple at Melmaruvathur in Kancheepuram district of Tamil Nadu. They started their journey from Bengaluru in three buses on Friday.

After offering special puja at Adhiparasakthi temple and worshipping at a few other temples, they reached Auro Beach on Sunday afternoon. 

While they were having lunch on the beach, Gauthman entered the sea. He was caught in a huge wave.

Vivek, who tried to rescue his brother, too was caught in the wave.

Other pilgrims and fishermen began to search for them in fishing boats.

After an hour, their bodies were washed ashore, around two km from the spot.

The Auroville police retrieved the bodies and sent them for postmortem.

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.