Jawan says food terrible, BSF says he's alcoholic

Bengaluru, Feb 19: Pointing out that there was a deliberate attempt to cover up police excesses by implicating innocent persons at whim, the Karnataka High Court on Tuesday granted conditional bail to 21 people who were accused by police of involving in violence during the protests against the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) in Mangaluru.

Allowing the bail petitions of Ashik and 20 others from Udupi and Dakshina Kannada districts, Justice John Michael Cunha said the overzealousness of the police is also evident from the fact that FIRs were registered under Section 307 of IPC against the persons killed by the police themselves.

“In an offence involving a large number of people, the identity and participation of each accused must be fixed with reasonable certainty. In the present cases, the identity appears to have been fixed on the basis of their affiliation to PFI and they being members of the Muslim community. Though it is stated that the involvement of the petitioners is captured in CCTV footage and photographs, no such material is produced before the court showing the presence of any of the petitioners at the spot, armed with deadly weapons,” the judge noted.

In the statement of objections filed by the State Public Prosecutor-I, it was stated that there was a hint of Muslim youths holding protest on December 19, 2019, opposing the implementation of CAA. Prohibitory orders were clamped in that connection. This assertion indicated that the common object of the assembly was to oppose the implementation of CAA and National Register for Citizens (NRC) which, by itself, was not an “unlawful object”, the judge pointed out.

‘Pics show cops throwing stones at crowd’

Justice Cunha also said the material collected by the investigators did not contain any specific evidence regarding the presence of any of the petitioners at the spot. On the other hand, omnibus allegations were made against the Muslim crowd of 1,500-2,000, alleging that they were armed with weapons like stones, soda bottles and glass pieces. The photographs produced by the SPP depicted that hardly any member of the crowd were armed with weapons, except one of them holding a bottle. In none of these photographs, police station or policemen were seen in the vicinity, the judge noted.

“On the other hand, photographs produced by the petitioners show that the policemen themselves were pelting stones at the crowd. The petitioners have produced copies of the complaints lodged by the dependants of the deceased who died due to police firing and the endorsement made thereon reveals that even though the law required the police to register independent FIRs in view of the specific complaint made against the police officers making out cognizable offences, the police have failed to register FIRs. This goes to show that a deliberate attempt is underway to cover up police excesses by implicating innocent persons at the whims and caprice of the police,” the judge observed.

In the wake of counter-allegations against the police and in the backdrop of their failure to register FIRs based on complaints lodged by the families of victims, the possibility of false and mistaken implication could not be ruled out, the judge said. In these circumstances, it would be a travesty of justice to deny bail to the petitioners and sacrifice their liberties to the mercy of the district administration and police. The records indicate that a deliberate attempt has been made to trump up evidence and to deprive the liberties of the petitioners by fabricating evidence. None of the petitioners have any criminal antecedents, the court said.

“The allegations levelled against the petitioners are not punishable with death or imprisonment for life. There is no direct evidence to connect them with the alleged offence. The investigation appears to be malafide and partisan. In the circumstances, in order to protect the rights and liberties of the petitioners, it is necessary to admit them to bail,” the judge said.

The petitioners were arrested and remanded in judicial custody after the anti-CAA protests on charges of being members of an unlawful assembly, armed with lethal weapons, attempting to set fire to the North Police Station in Mangaluru, obstructing the police from discharging their duties and causing damage to public property, etc., on December 19 in violation of the prohibitory orders. They moved the High Court as their bail pleas had been rejected by a sessions court in Dakshina Kannada.

Bengaluru, Jul 5: A 50-year-old woman with breathing difficulties died on Saturday after a shortage of beds forced 12 hospitals to refuse admission.

Her husband Babu said the family had approached 12 hospitals in three days, including Victoria Hospital and other private facilities, who all slammed their doors on them, citing a shortage of beds. The woman died on Saturday, a few minutes into her admission at KC General Hospital.

Second death 

A 35-year-old man, Manjunath, also died on Saturday after enduring fever for three days and being refused admission at several hospitals due to a shortage of beds.

As his condition worsened, his wife admitted him to a private hospital on Saturday after hours of ordeal. But the man died less than 15 minutes after getting admitted. Hospital authorities took swab samples from the deceased and said the body would be handed over after the test results.

BBMP personnel also failed to shift the body of a Covid-19 patient in Kalasipalya almost a day after the death.

Despite civic workers disinfecting the place, the neighbours were in a state of panic after the body was kept at home.

Bengaluru, Feb 5: Despite installing a BJP government in Karnataka through disguised operation Kamala, the Prime Minister Narendra Modi-led union government has continued its step motherly attitude towards this south Indian state.

Under the new formula adopted to share central taxes among states Karnataka will be the worst-affected. Though the 15th Finance Commission has recommended a special grant of Rs 5,495 crore for the state for 2020-21, the Centre appears reluctant to pay up and instead has asked for the proposal to be reviewed.

During the Union budget, the report of the 14th Finance Commission headed by NK Singh for 2020-21 was tabled in Lok Sabha. It shows besides Karnataka, Telangana, Mizoram and Kerala saw their central tax share decrease, while Uttar Pradesh, Bihar and Maharashtra were top gainers.

Karnataka's share has decreased from 4.7% provided by the previous finance commission, to 3.6%. Acknowledging there is a steep decline in Karnataka's share from 2019-20, the finance commission has recommended a special grant of Rs 5,495 crore for the state.

Its share in 2019-20 was Rs 36,675 crore, but under the new formula, Karnataka will get only Rs 31,180 crore in 2020-21 from the divisible pool of Rs 8.5 lakh crore - a decline of 22.5%.

Also, the decrease for Karnataka comes on the back of a shortfall in 2019-20. While the state was entitled to Rs 39,806 crore from the divisible pool, it got only Rs 36,675 crore as the Centre suffered a tax revenue shortfall of Rs 1.5 lakh crore.

What is more disheartening though is the Centre's refusal to pay the special grant. Instead, the Union finance ministry has asked the finance commission to reconsider the recommendation. This has prompted the state to take up the issue with the Centre.

"The decline in central taxes devolution comes at a time when the state is going through a tough financial situation. Steps are being taken to ensure Karnataka gets justice," said chief secretary TM Vijay Bhaskar.

Officials said besides corrective measures for 2020-21, the focus will be on ensuring a fair share in subsequent years. However, Karnataka has little chance of getting its dues as the Centre is known to be prudent when distributing tax proceeds among states.

"The Centre has certain views on devolution. We have done our duty by submitting the interim report. It's up to the states to convince the Centre," said Ravi Kota, joint secretary of 15th Finance Commission.

Under the new formula, the commission changed the weightage for some of the six criteria it considers - population, area, forest cover, income distance, demographic performance and tax effort.