HDK directs deputy commissioners to tackle rain emergencies

Bengaluru, Feb 18: A 26-year-old Kannada singer committed suicide over alleged dowry harassment on Monday. Sushmitha, a playback singer who got married to Sharath Kumar about one-and-a-half years ago, hung herself from the ceiling at her parent's home in Nagarabhavi, Bengaluru on Monday.

The singer sent a Whatsapp to her brother and mother before hanging herself early morning on Monday. She accused her husband and his relatives of dowry harassment in her death note.

According to Bengaluru Police, the singer has accused her husband, his sister and his aunt of harassing her for dowry in her death note. On Monday morning, Sushmitha's brother alerted the police after he found her dead body hanging from the ceiling. She used her dupatta to hang herself.

Sushmitha had lent her voice for Kannada songs in films like Haalu Thuppa and Srisamanya.

Police informed that Sushmitha sent a Whatsapp message to her brother, Sachin, at around 1 am on Sunday and explained that her husband Sharath and her relatives have been harassing her since the time she got married. Sachin read the message at around 5:30am and rushed to her room where he found her hanging from the ceiling.

In the text message, Sushmitha wrote that her husband, Sharath, his sister, Geetha, and his aunt, Vydehi, harassed her and they were the reason behind her ending her life. She also stated that she did not want to end her life in their house and hence came to her parents’ house.

The Annapoorneshwari Nagar police have registered a case of dowry death, charging her husband and his sister and aunt based on complaint filed by Sushmitha’s mother Meenakshi. The three accused are on run after hearing about her death and police said that efforts are on to trace them.

Sushmitha's husband Sharath Kumar is a manager in a car showroom and a resident of KS Nagar in Bengaluru.

New Delhi, Apr 9: The Delhi Police has traced Tablighi Jamaat leader Maulana Saad Kandhalvi, who has been on the run after an FIR was registered against him for organising a religious gathering last month despite restrictions to combat the coronavirus, sources said on Wednesday.

The cleric has been traced to Zakir Nagar in southeast Delhi, sources said.

His lawyer Tauseef Khan, however, said Saad is under self-quarantine and will join investigation after his quarantine period is over.

On March 31, Delhi Police's Crime Branch lodged an FIR against seven people, including the cleric, on a complaint by Station House Officer Nizamuddin for holding the congregation here allegedly in violation of the orders against large gathering and not maintaining social distancing to contain the spread of coronavirus.

A day later, the Delhi Police's Crime Branch wrote to Saad and others, seeking the details under Section 91 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. A second notice was also issued to him this week.

"Saad is currently under self-quarantine and will join investigation once the period of 14 days gets over," his advocate, Tauseef Khan, told PTI.

Saad's quarantine is expected to end next week.

His lawyer said a reply to the second notice will be given soon.

In an audio message last week, Saad said he was exercising self-quarantine after several hundreds who visited the Tablighi Jamaat's Nizamudddin markaz tested positive for coronavirus.

Visited by thousands last month, the Nizamudddin centre also turned out to be a hotspot for spread of coronavirus not only in national capital and country.

According to the FIR, the Delhi Police contacted the centre on March 21 and reminded them of the government order that prohibited any political or religious gathering of more than 50 people.

However, no one paid any heed to the police's direction, it said. Moreover, an audio recording purportedly of Saad was found in circulation on WhatsApp on March 21, in which he was heard asking his followers to defy the lockdown and social distancing and to attend the religious gathering of the Markaz.

On March 24, the government ordered 21-day nationwide lockdown and restricted any social, political or religious gathering.

The same day a meeting was held at Hazarat Nizamuddin police station between SHO and officer bearers of the centre.

The meeting was attended by Saad, Mohammad Ashraf, Mohammad Salman, Yunus, Mursaleen Saifi, Jishan and Mufti Shehzad and they were informed about lockdown orders.

So far, several hundred cases of COVID-19 cases across the country have been found to be linked to the Tablighi Jamaat congregation held in Delhi last month.

More than 25,500 Tablighi members and their contacts have been quarantined in the country after the Centre and the state governments conducted a "mega operation" to identify them.

At least 9,000 people participated in the religious congregation in Nizamuddin. Later, many of the attendees travelled to various parts of the country.

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.