Mangaluru: Bombay Residency opened

Bengaluru, Jun 21: As many as 518 private hospitals and medical colleges empanelled under the Suvarna Arogya Suraksha Trust (SAST) have been allowed to treat Covid-19 patients in Karnataka amid rising cases, an official said on Saturday.

"These 518 institutions across the state empanelled under ABArK are permitted to admit and treat Covid patients as per government protocols and criteria," the health official said.

The private hospitals can treat patients only if referred by public authorities such as BBMP Commissioner, Health department Director, District Health Officers and others.

In Bengaluru, there are 44 such empanelled private facilities. The entire list is available at www.arogya.karnataka.gov.in and also on the Health Department's website.

The hospitals will be paid an appropriate package rate for Covid management, said the official.

The state has not barred private hospitals from treating Covid patients but they have to mandatorily report all positive cases.

"Due to increasing number of Covid cases in the state, it was decided to involve private hospitals in treatment of such patients," said Additional Chief Secretary Jawaid Akhtar.

Also Read: These private hospitals in Mangaluru and Udupi can now treat covid patients
 

Bengaluru, May 22: Karnataka Congress delegation met Chief Election Commissioner, Dr B Basavaraju in Bengaluru, urging him to guide Karnataka Government to conduct local body elections and not to allow State government to nominate their party men to the local bodies.

The delegation was led by Congress leader Siddaramaiah and Karnataka Pradesh Congress Committee (KPCC) president D K Shivakumar.

"They (State government) wants to postpone the election, they have a lot of other provisions. We are demanding to protect the law, the government doesn't have the power to interfere in the system. We will not allow the state government to nominate their party men.

The CM and his entire team is responsible for this, they are killing the democracy and Panchayati Raj system of the State," said Shivakumar while speaking to the reporters.

The local body elections were scheduled to take place in the month of March or April, which were postponed in view of the COVID-19 crisis.

However, the date for conducting the local body elections has not been decided yet.

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.