Huge cache of weapons, steel bombs seized from BJP office in Kannur

Thiruvananthapuram, Mar 28: Kerala Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan has sought Prime Minister Narendra Modi's intervention to remove the blocking of roads including state highway along the border of Karnataka in view of lock down to contain the spread of COVID-19.

In a letter sent to the Prime Minister on Friday evening, the Chief Minister said certain actions by the Karnataka Police have resulted in the blocking the Thalassery-Coorg State Highway-30. This road connects Kerala with Coorg in Karnataka via Veerajapettah. This route is a lifeline for flow of essential commodities to Kerala."

"If this is blocked, vehicles carrying essential commodities will have to travel a much longer route to reach our state. Given the situation of national lock down, this will add much more hardship to people," it said.

"You will naturally agree with me that no action impeding the movement of essential commodities should be initiated at this moment of crisis," he hoped.

Bengaluru, Jul 13: Karnataka Minister CT Ravi has tested positive for COVID-19. However, his wife and staff members have tested negative.

"Yesterday, I along with my wife Pallavi and my staff members underwent COVID-19 test. Fortunately, my wife Pallavi and all my staff members are tested negative. Third umpire's result for me has confirmed that I'm COVID Positive. However, I'm feeling absolutely fine," Ravi tweeted.

"For now, I'll continue to work from here and undergo treatment. Very soon, I'll get cured and come back to work with you all," he added.
So far, Karnataka has reported 36,216 COVID-19 cases, according to the Union Ministry of Health and Family Welfare. 

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.