HDK to go ahead with son's wedding on April 17 with precautionary measures against COVID-19

Kasaragod, Apr 10: The death of five cats in the general hospital-turned-Covid-19 isolation centre here recently has evoked a little bit of scare among the health authorities who are eagerly awaiting the viscera test results of the dead animals.

The death of the cats has evoked anxiety in the backdrop of a tiger in a zoo in United States tested positive for Covid-19 recently.

It was recently that the hospital authorities had noticed the death of the cats, which include two male and a female adult and two kittens, were long been seen in and around the hospital compound.

Mangaluru, Apr 15: For the convenience of the public during the lockdown period, the Department of Posts has been providing essential services to the public at its various branch offices which are functioning from 1000 hrs to 1400 hrs.

Medicines and other essential items can be sent via parcel from any town to any place in Dakshina Kannada and Udupi districts.

Arrangements are also being made to extend this facility to nearby districts. In case of sending medicines and other essentials to other states from Mangaluru, the transportation has to be done via Bengaluru and can be expedited if a request for urgency is made, says a press release from the Senior Superintendent of Posts of Mangaluru Division on Wednesday.

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.