Lockdown hits Indian expats in Saudi Arabia hard. Will govt of India pay heed to their woes?

Bengaluru, Jul 1: Karnataka Pradesh Congress Committee (KPCC) chief DK Shivakumar on Wednesday said that the state Chief Minister BS Yediyurappa should apologise to the nation for the Ballari incident.

"It is shocking to see the Ballari incident. The way the dead bodies of the corona victims have been treated is very unfortunate. The entire country witnessed it. I request the Chief Minister BS Yediyurappa to apologise to the nation. India is known for its values and traditions," Shivakumar told reporters here.

Earlier, Shivakumar had posted a video which allegedly showed officials 'inhumanly' dumping bodies of those patients who die of COVID into a pit in Ballari, the district administration confirmed it and said that the entire field team involved in the incident has been disbanded.

"It's disturbing to see bodies of COVID patients who have died being dumped inhumanly into a pit in Ballari. Is this civility? This is a reflection of how the government has handled this Corona crisis. I urge the govt to take immediate action and ensure that this doesn't happen again," Shivakumar's tweet, which also had a video of the incident embedded, read.

The Deputy Commissioner, Ballari issued a press note which stated that it had conducted an enquiry after the video surfaced and it was found that the video belonged to the district and "comprises of burial of eight people who passed away after succumbing to COVID-19."

Although, according to the DC, all protocols and SOPs were followed by the team during the burial process, however, the "disrespectful handling of the bodies while being lowered on to the ground by the field staff" led to the entire field team involved being disbanded and will be replaced by a new team trained by the HOD, Forensic, VIMS.

The district administration also issued an unconditional apology to the families of the deceased and to others who were hurt by the incident.

Meanwhile, Chief Minister BS Yediyurappa also termed the behaviour of the staff "very inhuman and very painful" and urged the staff to tread cautiously with humanity in handling the funeral of those affected by the disease, and added, "Let's walk with humanity, and realize that there is no greater religion than humanity." 

Kolkata, Mar 1: The Calcutta High Court has ruled that it is not mandatory for foreigners to produce a valid passport and its particulars for processing of application for grant of Indian citizenship if he is able to satisfy the appropriate authorities the reasons for non-availability of the document.

Justice Sabysachi Bhattacharya passed the order while disposing off a petition by granting the petitioner liberty to file an application before the authority "as contemplated in Rule 11 of the Citizenship Rules 2009, upon furnishing explanation as to the non-availability of the passport".

Bismillah Khan had filed the petition saying he was being denied the citizenship of India because of his inability to file an application under Section 5 (1) (c) of the Citizenship Act, 1955, apparently due to the mandatory requirement of furnishing a copy of the passport for such application.

The petitioner's counsel submitted that Khan was a Pakhtoon citizen and due to political turmoil in the said state, which subsequently merged partially into Afghanistan and partially into Pakistan, he, as a five-year old, had to migrate to India with his father in 1973.

Under such circumstances, the petitioner could not have any opportunity of having a valid passport, since they were refugees under distress, the counsel said.

The petitioner had previously approached a coordinate Bench of the court, wherein a single judge, passed an order on July 25, 2018, directing him to comply with the formalities required, as communicated by the secretary to the Government of India to the Secretary to the Government of West Bengal (Home), vide a letter dated December 7, 2017.

The court had then also given liberty to the petitioner to apply afresh before the appropriate authority under Section 5(1)(c) of the 1955 Act, having complied with all the formalities.

The petitioner then moved Bhattacharya's court submitting that a complete application as directed by the Coordinate Bench cannot be possibly filed by his client due to the mandatory requirement of uploading a copy of his passport, which the petitioner does not have due to reasons beyond his control.

The counsel said Khan is married to an Indian citizen, has a daughter and living in India for close to half a century.

The counsel for the union of India submitted that in view of no application having been filed by the petitioner, there is no scope of granting such proposed application at the present juncture for the Union.

The counsel argued that it is mandatory to file an application in Form III for the application of the petitioner under Section 5(1)(c) of the Act to be considered at all.

In view of the petitioner not complying with the mandatory requirement of submitting a copy of his passport, the state government cannot, under the law, forward such application to the union government.

After hearing all sides, Justice Bhattacharya said although the rule "contemplates that an application shall not be entertained unless the application is made in Form III, such provision ipso facto does not make the availability of a passport a mandatory requirement".

"..the Form given with the Rules or the Rules themselves cannot override the provision of the statute itself, under which the said Rules are framed, which does not stipulate such a mandate on the applicants for citizenship under Section 5 (1)(c) of the 1955 Act mandatorily to carry a passport".

The court said although such provision is included in the Form, which has to be complied with by the applicant, "it is nowhere indicated in such Form that all the relevant particulars, including the particulars regarding passport of the petitioner have to be furnished mandatorily, along with a copy of a valid foreign passport, even in the event the petitioner, for valid reasons, is not in a position to produce such passport".

Justice Bhattacharya ruled that under such circumstances, it cannot be held that the provision of producing a passport and its particulars is mandatory in nature and there has to be a relaxation in such requirement "in case the petitioner is able to satisfy the appropriate authorities the reasons for non- availability of such passport".

"Unless such a leeway is given to the applicants, genuine persons who otherwise have all the formal documents indicating that they have been residing in India for a long time and have married a resident of India would also be unable to apply for Indian Citizenship despite having lived their entire lives and contributed to the economy and diverse culture of this country."

He said such a scenario would be contradictory to the spirit of Article 14 of the Constitution of India.

"In such view of the matter, the requirement of having a passport has to be read as optional in Form III of the Citizenship Rules, 2009 and the authorities are deemed to have the power to relax such 6 requirement in the event the applicant satisfied the authorities for genuine reasons why the applicant is not in a position to produce such passport," the February 24 order said.

The court ruled that despite the provision of making applications online, a provision has to be made for persons who do not have all the particulars of their passport, which is read as optional, to file applications manually, which are to be treated as valid applications under Rule 5 of the Citizenship Rules, 2009.

The court also ordered that alternatively the necessary software be amended so that the online applications can be presented with or without passports, in the latter case furnishing detailed reasons as to non-furnishing of passports.

"Sanctioning of such forms, however, will be conditional upon the satisfaction of the relevant authorities about the reasons for the applicant not being able to produce her/his passport," the order said.

Bengaluru, Apr 5: Opening of Karnataka's borders to Kerala at this point in time will be like "embracing death," chief minister B S Yediyurappa said on Saturday making clear his government's stand not opening the state border.

The chief minister repeatedly said that for his government interest of the people of the state was supreme.

Yediyurappa made his stand clear in a letter to former prime minister and JD(S) patriarch H D Deve Gowda.

Gowda had recently written to the chief minister on March 31 seeking relaxation of the border restrictions on "humanitarian" grounds.

He had also written to Kerala chief minister Pinarayi Vijayan expressing his anguish against Karnataka authorities for imposing restriction and promising to raise the matter with prime minister Narendra Modi.

Stating the decision to close the border was not sudden, Yediyurappa said, it was a conscious decision after analysing the health situation in the area following the spread of COVID-19.

The chief minister cited the Indian Medical Association, Mangaluru branch data regarding the spread of Covid-19 in Kasargod of Kerala and surrounding areas which was alarming.

Noting that the region has nearly 106 positive coronaviruscases, he said, "this is the region with most number of infections in the country."

If this restriction is removed, it puts the health of the people of Karnataka in to risk and create a situation of "embracing death", so we will not be able to open the border, Yediyurappa said.

He also clarified that there was no prejudice behind his government's decision, and the interest of the people of the state was of utmost importance.

"...There is also no political maliciousness. We want to have good and brotherly relationship with neighbouring states," he said, adding that opening the border will open a pandora's box that will be disastrous for the state.

Yediyurappa also thanked opposition parties for their support to his government in its fight against COVID-19.