Hindu population reducing in India, minorities flourishing: Rijiju

Abu Dhabi, Feb 17: NMC Health Plc, a hospital operator targeted by short-seller Muddy Waters, said founder Bavaguthu Raghuram Shetty resigned amid investor concern he faced a margin call and misrepresented his stake.

The board asked for Co-Chairman Shetty’s resignation and it takes effect immediately, according to a person with knowledge of the situation. NMC has lost four board members since Friday, including Vice Chairman Khaleefa Butti, whose holdings are also being probed. The stock, the worst performer on the FTSE-100 Index this year, fell as much as 9.2 percent Monday morning and then rebounded.

“The resignation of senior board members should be viewed positively,” said Abdulla Nahlawi, an analyst at Rasmala Investment Bank in Dubai. “The credibility of the current board has been jeopardized with the unfolding of the recent events.”

NMC shares lost almost half their value the first week of February on speculation the company’s main investors faced a margin call, in which banks seize shares pledged as collateral. NMC said Friday that First Abu Dhabi Bank and Al Salam Bank Bahrain obtained 20 million shares in the company from BRS International Holding, an investment vehicle of NMC’s top shareholders. The banks sold more than 8 million of those shares as “enforcement of security,” NMC said.

NMC operates the largest medical network in the United Arab Emirates and in 2012 became the first Abu Dhabi company to list in London. The shares started teetering in mid-December when Muddy Waters alleged that NMC manipulated its balance sheet and inflated the prices of companies it acquired.

Shetty, 77, was born in India and founded NMC in the 1970s after moving to Abu Dhabi. His spokesman said a legal review of the situation is ongoing and declined further comment.

Chief Investment Officer Hani Buttikhi and board member Abdulrahman Basaddiq also stepped down because they were appointees of Shetty and Butti, NMC said, adding that they had no knowledge of the share transfers.

Questions remain over the role of Shetty’s family at the company. His wife and son-in-law both hold roles in senior management.

Almost 10 per cent of NMC’s freely traded shares are shorted, according to Markit Securities data. In mid-December about a third of them were.

Last week GKSD Investment, an investment company backed by hospital investors, said it’s studying a possible offer for NMC. Under U.K. takeover rules, it has until March 9 to make a bid.

NMC has said Muddy Waters’s claims are false and the company hired former FBI Director Louis Freeh to conduct an independent review. The review is due to be completed before the company issues its financial results in March, the person said.

NMC said Mark Tompkins will continue as the company’s sole chairman.

Mangaluru, May 20: The Third Vande Bharat Mission flight carrying 63 repatriates from Muscat landed at Mangaluru International Airport at 8.35 pm on Wednesday. It was piloted by Mangalurean captain Michael Saldanha.

More than half of the passengers from Muscat alighted in Bengaluru where the flight landed first. Remaining 63 passengers came to Mangaluru. 

After landing, all the passengers were given health kits, food and mobile SIMs, and arrangements were made to change their currency at the airport. 

A health department team screened each passenger, after which emigration formalities were completed. Their throat swab samples will be tested for Covid-19 on Thursday.

Union fertiliser minister D V Sadananda Gowda tweeted on Wednesday that the next Vande Bharat Mission flight is scheduled on Friday from Doha to Mangaluru. The flight will land at Mangaluru at 9.55 pm. 

The third repatriation flight from Dubai to Mangaluru is scheduled on Saturday. It will first land at Bengaluru and later fly to Mangaluru. However, there are no flights from Bahrain, Saudi Arabia and Kuwait to Mangaluru.

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.