Mangaluru: Narrow escape for college girls as car plunges into river

Bengaluru, Jun 7: Suspense over JD(S) patriarch HD Deve Gowda contesting the Rajya Sabha polls from Karnataka with Congress' support continues as KPCC president D K Shivakumar on Saturday said the party has fielded one candidate and the high command will decide on what do with surplus votes.

Mr Shivakumar also said his official takeover as party state unit president is likely to take place on June 14.

"Whatever our national leadership will decide... For now we are fielding only one candidate, regarding surplus votes whatever our high command says, we will abide by it," he said in response to a question about supporting Deve Gowda.

Polls for four Rajya Sabha seats from Karnataka is scheduled for June 19.

The Congress, which can win one seat with its strength in the assembly, has fielded veteran party leader Mallikarjun Kharge as the candidate, while the BJP is yet to decide on candidates for two seats it can win.

The JD(S), which has 34 seats in the assembly, is not in a position to win a seat in Rajya Sabha on its own, and will need support from one of the national parties with their surplus votes for this.

Minimum 44 votes are required for candidates to win.

Speculation is rife that congress is likely to support JD(S) with its surplus votes if the regional party fields Mr Gowda, and in return may seek favour during legislative council polls slated later this month.

Though JD(S) legislators are of the unanimous opinion that Mr Gowda should contest Rajya Sabha polls, the 87-year-old leader is said to be undecided and weighing options.

If he contests and wins, this will be the second Rajya Sabha entry for him, the first time being in 1996 as Prime Minister.

June 9 is the last date for filing nominations.

Stating that on June 8, Mallikarjun Kharge will file his nomination for Rajya Sabha polls, DK Shivakumar requested party workers not to come to Congress office or Vidhana Soudha, where the nomination will be filed, because of the COVID-19 pandemic.

"Let your love and affection continue, but let's not create problems by gathering here. After the election is over, and once he (Kharge) wins, you can greet and congratulate him. Let's not bring a bad name to his seniority for not maintaining social distancing by gathering," he said.

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.