Karnataka launches new scholarship scheme for OBC students

New Delhi, Mar 19: Senior Congress leader Oscar Fernandes on Wednesday extolled the virtues of 'gaumutra' and shared an anecdote about a man claiming to have cured his cancer by drinking cow urine to drive his point home.

Participating in a debate in Rajya Sabha on two bills for setting up national commissions for homoeopathy and Indian systems of medicine, the former Union minister said, "My extreme friend Jairam Ramesh pulls my leg, when I talk of 'gaumutra'."

Sharing an anecdote, Fernandes said once during a visit to an ashram near Meerut he had met a person who claimed to have cured his cancer by drinking 'gaumutra'.

Many BJP leaders have earlier spoken about the healing power of 'gaumutra'. The Congress has reacted sharply to such remarks.

He also praised the virtues of the Indian systems of medicine. He said when he had severe pain in knee joint and doctors had suggested for replacement surgery. However, he refused and started doing 'Vajrasana'.

"I started Vajrasana, practising yoga, and today I am able to do wrestling without any difficulty," the septuagenarian leader said.

"When (former) prime minister (Atal Bihari) Vajypee ji had a knee surgery, I thought if I had known him earlier, I would have definitely gone to him and ask him to follow 'Vajrasan' and it could have been cured," he said.

He also claimed to have met a person in US aged around 104 years and moving swiftly as a young man.

"Yoga is our wealth. If you practise yoga, may be our budget cost of health can be reduced by 50 per cent. It's way of life," he said.

"Our own Indian systems of medicine will provide a lot of reliefs even before going to a doctor," he said.

Though Fernandes supported the bills but raised objection over the exclusion of yoga and naturopathy.

"I would urge the minister either to amend the bill or bring an assurance that it will bring a separate legislation to cover yoga and naturopathy," he said.

Bengaluru, Jul 8: Kannada television actor Susheel Gowda has reportedly committed suicide in his home town Mandya.

 According to reports, the actor killed himself yesterday. The exact reason for suicide hasn't been revealed yet. 

The news has come as a shock to many celebrities. The actor was over 30 years of age and had acted in TV shows. 

He played a role in serial Anthapura and was looking forward to establishing himself in the Kannada Film Industry. Other than an actor, he was also a fitness trainer. 

Shocked by the news of Susheel Gowda's death, Duniya Vijay wrote on Facebook (translated), "When I first saw him I thought he is a hero material. Even before the movie got released he has left us too soon. Whatever may be the problem suicide is not the answer. I think the series of deaths will not end this year. It is not only because of Coronavirus people fear, people are losing faith because they don’t have job which can give them the money to lead a life. It is high time to stay stronger to overcome the crisis."

Susheel Gowda has played the role of a cop in the upcoming film Salaga. It stars Duniya Vijay in the leading role.

Susheel's co-star Amita Ranganath said, "I got the news from my friend. I still can’t believe that he is no more. He was such a sweet and soft hearted person who never loses his cool. It’s been very sad to know that he has left us so early. He had the talent to achieve more in the entertainment industry.” 

Director of the serial Anthpura, Aravind Koushik on his face book page posted "Sad news I heard . Susheel Gowda who played the lead in the tv serial Antahpura that I directed is no more . Rest in Peace."

She also shared a picture with Susheel on her Instagram story and expressed her grief.

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.