India will be free of Congress due to Rahul: Ananth Kumar

Mangaluru, Dec 15: A bandh-like situation prevailed in many parts of Dakshina Kannada on Wednesday as thousands of people closed their shops and business establishments to support the ant-NRC protest at Adyar Kannur in Mangaluru.

The protest is jointly being organised by the various Muslim organisations of Dakshina Kannada and Udupi district under the leadership of Muslim Central Committee against the Citizenship (Amendment) Act (CAA), National Register of Citizens (NRC) and National Population Register (NPR) besides the “categorical mistreatment” of Muslim community at the hands of the police across the country including in Mangaluru.

In Mangaluru city, even though people woke up to a normal Wednesday, by afternoon most of the Muslim-owned shops were closed.

Muslim dominant areas of the district such have observed half-day bandh. In regions like Ullal, Thokkottu, Bantwal, BC Road, Kalladka too a majorty of the Muslim business establishments remained shut afternoon.

Also Read: 

#MangaluruAgainstNRC | Sea of protesters converge at Adyar ground to assert their identity

‘Who are you? Are you British?’ PFI leader lambasts Mangaluru top cop at anti-NRC protest

Mangaluru, Jan 23: The Muslim Central Committee of Dakshina Kannada and Udupi and Humanity Forum of Mangaluru today handed over a cheque of Rs 10 lakh to the aggrieved family of Naushin, who was killed in arbitrary police firing on December 19 in the city.

A team of philanthropists led by Muslim Central Committee chairman K S Mohammad Masood visited Shaheed Nausheen’s house at Kudroli and handed over the cheque. Several philanthropists have contributed to this humanitarian aid.

Corporator Shamsuddin Kudroli, S M Rasheed Haji, Mansoor Ahmed Azad, Ibrahim Kodichal, Haneef Haji, Asif Deals and Ashraf Kinara were present among others.

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.