Hindu Samajotsav: Togadia calls for elimination of Pakistan; Pejawar seer taunts CM

Mangaluru, Mar 30: In continuing cases of tipplers in the southern states ending their lives due to non-availability of liquor during the lockdown, two men committed suicide in Karnataka's Dakshina Kannada district.

The two suicides were reported in Kadaba taluk on Saturday, police said.

Tomy Thomas (50), a rubber tapping labourer in an estate at Kutrupadi village of the taluk, was found hanging at his rented house on Saturday. Thomas, a native of Kottayam in Kerala, had joined at the estate here a month ago.

Local people said he was desperately moving around in the last few days asking about places where he can get liquor. He had also not reported to work in these days. The body has been kept at the mortuary of a hospital at Deralakatte.

In another incident, a 70-year old man, belonging to Kodimbala village in the taluk, allegedly hanged himself from the branch of a tree near his house at Nakur.

The deceased has been identified as Thomas, who had left his family here 30 years ago and had been working in Kerala. He had returned here only a few years back.

Sources said Thomas, an alcohol addict, was having health problems related to withdrawal. He has been living on pavements at Kadaba without going home.

Kadaba police has registered cases in connection with the two incidents.

Incidents of tipplers committing suicide have been reported in Kerala and Telangana in the past few days. Two men ended their lives in Kerala today while a 50-year old daily wage worker jumped to death from a building in Hyderabad on Friday.

Kalaburagi, May 15: Former Karnataka Minister Dr Sharanprakash Patil and 22 others, including several local Congress leaders, have been booked for violating lockdown guidelines by conducting a meeting at a convention hall in Sulpeth town on May 13.

The FIR was registered on Thursday against 23 persons, including the former MLA and 21 local Congress leaders, under Section 188 (disobedience to order duly promulgated by a public servant) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

Congress leader Patil and his followers had conducted a meeting at a convention hall in Sulpeth town on May 13, following which sectoral magistrate Muneer Ahmed lodged a complaint.

This comes as the country of under lockdown and the Centre and states have issued strict social distancing and other norms to be followed to prevent the spread of coronavirus.

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.