Hindutva group demands Modi's apology for remarks against gau rakshaks

Bengaluru, May 18: Karnataka Chief Minister BS Yediyurappa on Monday said that people from Gujarat, Maharashtra, Kerala and Tamil Nadu will not be allowed in the state till May 31.

"We have decided not to allow entry of people from Gujarat, Maharashtra, Kerala and Tamil Nadu till May 31," Yediyurappa said after a meeting with state ministers and senior government officers to discuss the guidelines issued by the Centre regarding the fourth phase of nationwide lockdown.

"State road transport corporation buses in Karnataka and private buses will run. Strict lockdown measures in containment zones and economic activities will be permitted in other areas. Sundays will be total lockdown across the state. Home quarantine will be strengthened," he added.

The Chief Minister further said that all shops will be allowed to open and all trains running within the state will be permitted.

The central government on Sunday extended the ongoing COVID-19 induced nationwide lockdown till May 31, but with a set of new relaxations commencing from Monday. The Union Home Ministry has also given powers to States/UTs demarcate areas in Green, Orange and Red zones, which will allow them to start activities except in containment zones.

According to the guidelines, "all other activities will be permitted except those which are specifically prohibited under these guidelines. However, in containment zones, only essential activities shall be allowed, as mentioned earlier."

Bengaluru, Feb 6: A 33 -year-old techie who was on the run after allegedly bludgeoning her mother to death and attempting to murder her brother at their house near KR Puram early on Sunday was arrested along with her friend from a hotel in Port Blair, Andaman and Nicobar Islands, on Wednesday morning.

C Amruta and Sridhar Rao were produced before a court in Port Blair to get a transit warrant, deputy commissioner of police (Whitefield) MN Anuchet said. Police initially thought she had committed the crime as she was unable to repay a loan of Rs 15 lakh and feared being humiliated by the lenders.

"But now we strongly suspect that Amruta and Rao were in a relationship, which was opposed by her mother and brother. We don't see any other reason for her to attack her family members. We can get more details only after questioning the duo," another police officer said, adding, "The most important question is: Did Rao know Amruta was going to kill her mother? Or he got to know about it only later? He'd booked their air tickets to Port Blair on January 31 itself."

Rao and Amruta worked together in a software company in Whitefield till 2017. "Then they joined different firms and were in constant touch," police said.

Preliminary probe revealed the duo flew to Port Blair by catching a flight from Kempegowda International Airport (KIA) at 6.30am on Sunday. CCTV footage had shown Rao - wearing a full-face helmet and carrying a backpack - waiting near Amruta's house on a gearless scooter on Sunday morning. After she arrived, they chatted for a while before riding away. They arrived at KIA on the same bike, police said.

"We checked the passengers' list at KIA for that day and found Amruta's name. With the help of Port Blair police, we traced the duo to a hotel," an investigating officer said.

On Sunday morning, Amruta hit her 54-year-old mother C Nirmala on the head with a digging bar. She later stabbed her younger brother C Harish in the neck. Harish collapsed and thinking that he was dead, she left the house.

In his statement to police, Harish stated, "Around 4.30am, Amruta entered my room and stabbed me. I asked her what was wrong. She said she had a debt of Rs 15 lakh and didn't want the debtors to harass me and our mother."

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.