Mangaluru cops book a suspect for audio threat against Janardhana Poojary

New Delhi, Jan 19: Senior Congress leader Kapil Sibal on Sunday asserted that every state assembly has the constitutional right to pass a resolution and seek the amended Citizenship Act's withdrawal, but if the law is declared constitutional by the Supreme Court then it will be problematic to oppose it.

His remarks came a day after he had said there is no way a state can deny the implementation of the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) when it is already passed by the Parliament.

"I believe the CAA is unconstitutional. Every State Assembly has the constitutional right to pass a resolution and seek its withdrawal. When and if the law is declared to be constitutional by the Supreme Court then it will be problematic to oppose it. The fight must go on!" Sibal said in a tweet.

His remarks on the CAA at the Kerala Literature Festival (KLF) on Saturday had caused a flutter as several non-BJP governments, including Kerala, Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh, West Bengal and Maharashtra, have voiced their disagreement with the CAA as well as National Register of Citizens (NRC) and National Population Register (NPR).

"If the CAA is passed no state can say 'I will not implement it'. It is not possible and is unconstitutional. You can oppose it, you can pass a resolution in the Assembly and ask the central government to withdraw it.

"But constitutionally saying that I won't implement, it is going to be problematic and going to create more difficulties," said the former minister of law and justice.

Mangaluru, May 23: Criticising the Karnataka government's fresh protocol for management of Covid-19 as expensive, a prominent physician in the city has demanded its withdrawal.

According to Dr B Srinivas Kakkilaya, the protocol released by the Health and Family Welfare Department on May 15 enlists unnecessary and unconfirmed tests and treatments. 

The protocol has classified Covid-19 cases into three categories and has provided for hospitalisation of all three categories of patients, from asymptomatic to the most severely ill.

In a letter to the government, Dr Kakkilaya said: "The protocol suggests several investigations to be done right on the day of admission, including blood counts, liver and renal function tests, chest X Ray, ECG, CT scan of the chest, and other special investigations, all of which, if done, will cost Rs 25,000 per patient."

"In the coming days when lakhs of patients are likely to be infected with SARS CoV2, is it necessary and feasible to hospitalise and test all these patients at Rs 25,000 per person," he questioned.

The treatment options suggested in the protocol are also surprising, he pointed out. "The protocol recommends choloroquine, azithromycin, oseltamivir, zinc and vitamin C for all patients, from asymptomatic to the severely ill, and also anti coagulant injections for many patients. All these would cost at least Rs 5,000 per patient. For severe cases of Covid-19, many unproven and experimental treatments have been suggested, which are very expensive and highly questionable," Dr Kakkilaya notes.

Therefore, this protocol, he asserted was not evidence based and likely to do more harm than good. He said these unnecessarily expensive tests and allowing private companies to conduct trials on Covid-19 patients is likely to be misused by vested interests and must be immediately withdrawn, and instead, a protocol that is evidence-based, simple and avoiding unnecessary expenses, must be developed.

New Delhi, Mar 6: The Supreme Court on Friday refused to entertain a plea seeking framing of a proper mechanism to deal with alleged misuse of the sedition law by the government machinery. A bench headed by Justice A M Khanwilkar dismissed the plea filed by a social activist and said it was open for the petitioner to approach the appropriate authority.

At the outset, the apex court told advocate Utsav Singh Bains, appearing for the petitioner, that he could not seek quashing of an FIR in a sedition case filed against the management of a Karnataka school for allegedly allowing students to stage an anti-CAA and anti-NRC drama.

Bains told the bench that he was not just pressing for a prayer to quash the FIR but the petitioner has also sought a direction for framing of a proper mechanism to deal with the alleged misuse of the sedition law.

"Let the affected party come and we will hear them. Why it should be done at your instance," the bench said, refusing to entertain the petition.

The petition had sought quashing of the FIR against the principal and other staff of the Shaheen School at Bidar who have been booked under sections 124A (sedition) and 153A (promoting enmity between different groups) of the Indian Penal Code.

The plea had also sought an apex court direction for a proper mechanism to deal with alleged government misuse of the sedition law.

Section 124A of the IPC says that "whoever brings or attempts to bring into hatred or contempt, or excites or attempts to excite disaffection towards... the Government shall be punished with imprisonment for life...".

The plea had sought a direction to the Centre and the Karnataka government "to quash the FIR registered in connection of seditious charges against the school management, teacher and a widowed parent of a student for staging a play criticising CAA, NRC and NPR."

The petition had claimed that the police "also questioned students, and videos and screenshots of CCTV footage showing them speaking to the students were shared widely on social media, prompting criticism."

The drama was staged on January 21 by students of the fourth, the fifth and the sixth standard.

The sedition case was filed based on a complaint by social worker Neelesh Rakshyal on 26 January.

The complainant alleged that the school authorities "used" the students to perform a drama where they "abused" Modi in the context of the Citizenship (Amendment) Act and the National Register of Citizens.