Mangaluru cattle trader found dead in Udupi; family blames Bajrang Dal

New Delhi, Mar 4: The Supreme Court on Wednesday directed a trial court in Ramanagara district of Karnataka to ensure the presence of absconding self-styled godman Swami Nithyananda to face trial in a 2010 rape case.

A bench headed by Chief Justice SA Bobde also allowed a plea by K Lenin alias Nithya Dharmananda, former driver of Nithyananda and had filed a complaint against Nithyananda, for cancellation of non-bailable warrants issued against him.

The apex court ordered the cancellation of the non-bailable warrants issued against the complainant in the case on the condition he shows up before the trial court in Ramanagara district today itself.

He had challenged the Karnataka High Court's February order where non-bailable warrants were issued against Lenin for not appearing before the court for recording evidence.

"Having heard the counsel appearing for the petitioner and upon perusal of the record, we see no reason to interfere with the judgment and order passed by the High Court, which merely directs the petitioner to give evidence in support of his complaint," read the apex court order passed on Tuesday.

The Bench also directed that "the concerned trial court shall make every effort to ensure the presence of accused (Nithyananda) to face the proceedings."

The Karnataka High Court had last month cancelled the bail granted to Nithyananda, even as the state police claimed the absconding godman was on a 'spiritual tour'.

Nithyananda is facing charges of rape and indulging in unnatural sex. He was arrested on April 22, 2010, however, granted bail on June 11, the same year.

Chennai, Feb 5: In order to ensure housing for all, the Madras High Court has proposed ban on non-resident Indians from purchasing houses in India, prohibit speculative sale, and impose 100 per cent extra stamp duty on purchase of second house.

The court on its own impleaded the Union housing and finance ministries as party respondents.

It has directed them to answer a series of questions including as to how many families have basic amenity of housing in India as well as in Tamil Nadu, population and housing ratio in the country and in the state, when 'Housing for All' mission of the central government would be achieved.

"Why the government does not consider imposing such restrictions to control escalation of house prices and to provide a house to every family in the country, a division bench of Justice N Kirubakaran and Justice Abdul Quddhose wondered.

Directing the authorities to inform as to whether the central and state have got special schemes to provide housing for the marginalized and economically weaker sections including SC/ST communities, the bench has also sought the details of the number of families that possess more than one house.

"Why the governments do not restrict families/individuals from purchasing/possessing more than one housing unit/flat/plot till "Housing for all" is achieved?

Why not the government charge 100 per cent more or extra stamp duty to discourage buying more than one house by a family while purchasing second house?

Why not the government conditionally allow the families to purchase more than one house provided the said family pays 100 per cent extra statutory dues like property tax, electricity charges, water and sewerage charges on the second property?" the bench said.

This apart, the court also wanted the authorities to know as to why it should not prohibit the NRIs from purchasing houses in India to bring down the cost of housing.

Justifying its directions, the court said "Lakhs and lakhs of people are living on platforms, roads, and cement pipes, slums, under the trees and on banks of water bodies without proper shelter and basic amenities and safety."

It is true that the Centre had taken a policy decision to provide housing unit to every family.

It should be achieved at the earliest, the court said, adding it could become fruitful when restrictions are put on persons who hold more than one housing units.

The court passed the order while hearing an appeal moved by the Tamil Nadu Housing Board challenging a single judge order against acquisition of about 369 acres of private land in Thudiyalur and Vellakinar areas of Coimbatore for a housing scheme.

Bengaluru, Jul 24: A government doctor who was turned away by three private hospitals because he could not produce a coronavirus test result passed away today in Bengaluru. Dr Manjunath, who was a frontline COVID-19 doctor, was allegedly turned away by hospitals when he was extremely ill and struggling to breathe.

Dr Manjunath worked in the state Health and Family Welfare department and was based in Ramanagara district, around 50 km from Bengaluru.

D Randeep, a Special Officer with the Bengaluru municipal body BBMP, said that the hospitals that had refused to admit Dr Manjunath would be reported to the health department.

In June-end, Dr Manjunath went to Rajashekhar Hospital in JP Nagar, BGS Global Hospital in Kengeri and Sagar hospital in Kumaraswamy Layout. All three demanded to see his COVID-19 test result but those were still not in at the time, according to his family. His brother-in-law Nagendra is also a doctor with BBMP and in charge of allotting hospital beds, yet he was completely helpless when it came to his own relative.

He was finally admitted to Sagar hospital on June 25 when his family sat in protest on the footpath outside the Dayananda Sagar campus. He was placed on ventilator and later shifted to the Bangalore Medical College and Research Institute, where he died earlier today. The hospital says Dr Manjunath was discharged on July 9 because he wanted plasma therapy.

Six members of his family, including a 14-year-old, tested COVID-19 positive. Most of them have recovered.

Bengaluru has seen several cases of patients being turned away from hospitals in the city. Hospitals say they need Covid test results to know whether to admit patients in the coronavirus ICU or in the general section and to understand treatment protocol.

Mr Randeep said hospitals have been instructed to admit patients even without such a certificate. Notices have been sent to hospitals that fail to comply. The OPD of two private hospitals was sealed for 48 hours when they refused to admit a patient.