Mangaluru: Veteran football player, coach TA Rahman passes away

Bengaluru, Apr 16: Karnataka Deputy Chief Minister Dr Ashwath Narayan today said that if former chief minister HD Kumaraswamy, being a law-abiding citizen, does not follow guidelines then action will be taken against him.

The Deputy CM made this comment when he was asked about Kumaraswamy's son Nikhil's marriage, which has been fixed on April 17 at a farmhouse near Bidadi in Ramnagar.

Narayan said: "Any violation of the guidelines will not be tolerated. We will ask the concerned authority to film the entire event and document it."

He said that so far Kumaraswamy has made public statements that guidelines will be followed.

"HD Kumaraswamy is a people's representative. He has been in public life for a long time. He should abide by the guidelines," Narayan said.

"Since he has been in a responsible position for a long time and he was the Chief Minister, guidelines must be followed in his son's marriage as per the rules amid COVID-19 scare.

After the marriage, there must not be any excuses. He cannot say that people came without an invitation," the Deputy Chief Minister added.

Kumaraswamy clarified that only his family members will attend the marriage and that there will be around 60 to 70 people.

"All guidelines will be followed as per the central government directives," he said.

Bengaluru, May 3: Five more COVID-19 cases have been reported from Karnataka, taking the total number of coronavirus cases in the state to 606, the state government said on Sunday.

The total number of cases includes, 25 deaths and 282 discharged.

"Five new COVID-19 positive cases have been reported in Karnataka from 2nd May, 5 pm to 3rd May, 12 noon; taking the total number of positive cases to 606 which includes 25 deaths and 282 discharges," the government stated.

According to the statement, out of the five cases, three have been reported from Kalaburagi and two have been identified from Mudhol.

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.