Mangaluru witnesses another murder: Target Gang Ilyas on bail hacked to death

Bengaluru, Mar 8: The Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR) has identified three more locations to open Viral Research Diagnostic Laboratories (VRDL) including in Mysuru, Hassan, and Shivamogga in Karnataka.

According to a statement issued here on Sunday, these laboratories will start functioning shortly in Mysuru Medical College and Research Institute, Hassan Institute of Medical Sciences, and Shivamogga Institute of Medical Sciences. Besides, the ICMR has also identified sample collection centres in Vijayanagar Institute of Medical Science in Ballari and Kalaburgi Institute of Medical Sciences.

B G Prakash, State Joint Director (Communicable Diseases), said that the new Laboratories will help to ease the load on the two designated laboratories in Bengaluru. Currently, the virology laboratory in Bangalore Medical College and Research Institute and the NIV branch in Rajiv Gandhi Institute of Chest Diseases are doing COVID-19 tests in Karnataka.

Bengaluru, Apr 11: Former prime minister H D Deve Gowda claimed the lockdown decision was taken in 'haste' without forethought because of which farmers and the working class were 'suffering' and suggested measures to mitigate the impact. The state government should have consulted experienced citizens, officials, progressive farmers, farmer organisations and wholesale traders about the pros and cons before lockdown, he said in a letter to Chief Minister B S Yediyurappa, while highlighting that 61 per cent of the state's population depended on agriculture.

Because of the "hasty decision taken without any preparations", farmers of the country and the state are facing financial distress," he said in the April 9 letter, a copy of which was released to media here on Friday. The JD(S) patriarch suggested taking up some measures, including ensuring no restrictions on agriculture activities, procurement of horticulture produce at a fair price, relaxing export curbs on it, to provide relief to farmers, agriculture labourers, and daily wage workers.

On Sunday, Gowda had said he has assured Prime Minister Narendra Modi of his support in the nation's battle against COVID-19 pandemic when the latter called him to discuss the situation. In his letter to the chief minister, Gowda said: "...the lockdown implemented to control the spread of coronavirus has led our farmers into despair and put their lives into a burning fire.

This lockdown looks like a decision taken at haste without proper thinking and forethought for our farmers, agriculture labourers, and daily wage workers." He said the lockdown decision was taken after remaining 'quite' for about two months since the first corona infection was reported in the country on January 30. Among the suggestions made by the former prime minister include, procurement of horticulture produce at a fair price like in the case of milk from villages by the government through related organisations like Karnataka Horticulture Federation, HOPCOMS among others.

As horticulture produce was perishable, there should be no restriction on its procurement, transportation and marketing; all processing related activities of horticulture produce should be given relaxation from the lockdown, he said. Gowda also called for relaxation on exports for horticulture produce and its processed items. There should be no restriction on agriculture activities; a national grid has to be set up for marketing of horticulture produce, he said.

If such measures were not taken up immediately, the government will have to pay compensation to farmers for losses. Lack of remedial measures would lead to a shortage of supply, leading to rebellion from the people and may result in farmers' suicides and bringing about a situation that might be more grave than coroanvirus, he said.

Kolkata, Mar 1: The Calcutta High Court has ruled that it is not mandatory for foreigners to produce a valid passport and its particulars for processing of application for grant of Indian citizenship if he is able to satisfy the appropriate authorities the reasons for non-availability of the document.

Justice Sabysachi Bhattacharya passed the order while disposing off a petition by granting the petitioner liberty to file an application before the authority "as contemplated in Rule 11 of the Citizenship Rules 2009, upon furnishing explanation as to the non-availability of the passport".

Bismillah Khan had filed the petition saying he was being denied the citizenship of India because of his inability to file an application under Section 5 (1) (c) of the Citizenship Act, 1955, apparently due to the mandatory requirement of furnishing a copy of the passport for such application.

The petitioner's counsel submitted that Khan was a Pakhtoon citizen and due to political turmoil in the said state, which subsequently merged partially into Afghanistan and partially into Pakistan, he, as a five-year old, had to migrate to India with his father in 1973.

Under such circumstances, the petitioner could not have any opportunity of having a valid passport, since they were refugees under distress, the counsel said.

The petitioner had previously approached a coordinate Bench of the court, wherein a single judge, passed an order on July 25, 2018, directing him to comply with the formalities required, as communicated by the secretary to the Government of India to the Secretary to the Government of West Bengal (Home), vide a letter dated December 7, 2017.

The court had then also given liberty to the petitioner to apply afresh before the appropriate authority under Section 5(1)(c) of the 1955 Act, having complied with all the formalities.

The petitioner then moved Bhattacharya's court submitting that a complete application as directed by the Coordinate Bench cannot be possibly filed by his client due to the mandatory requirement of uploading a copy of his passport, which the petitioner does not have due to reasons beyond his control.

The counsel said Khan is married to an Indian citizen, has a daughter and living in India for close to half a century.

The counsel for the union of India submitted that in view of no application having been filed by the petitioner, there is no scope of granting such proposed application at the present juncture for the Union.

The counsel argued that it is mandatory to file an application in Form III for the application of the petitioner under Section 5(1)(c) of the Act to be considered at all.

In view of the petitioner not complying with the mandatory requirement of submitting a copy of his passport, the state government cannot, under the law, forward such application to the union government.

After hearing all sides, Justice Bhattacharya said although the rule "contemplates that an application shall not be entertained unless the application is made in Form III, such provision ipso facto does not make the availability of a passport a mandatory requirement".

"..the Form given with the Rules or the Rules themselves cannot override the provision of the statute itself, under which the said Rules are framed, which does not stipulate such a mandate on the applicants for citizenship under Section 5 (1)(c) of the 1955 Act mandatorily to carry a passport".

The court said although such provision is included in the Form, which has to be complied with by the applicant, "it is nowhere indicated in such Form that all the relevant particulars, including the particulars regarding passport of the petitioner have to be furnished mandatorily, along with a copy of a valid foreign passport, even in the event the petitioner, for valid reasons, is not in a position to produce such passport".

Justice Bhattacharya ruled that under such circumstances, it cannot be held that the provision of producing a passport and its particulars is mandatory in nature and there has to be a relaxation in such requirement "in case the petitioner is able to satisfy the appropriate authorities the reasons for non- availability of such passport".

"Unless such a leeway is given to the applicants, genuine persons who otherwise have all the formal documents indicating that they have been residing in India for a long time and have married a resident of India would also be unable to apply for Indian Citizenship despite having lived their entire lives and contributed to the economy and diverse culture of this country."

He said such a scenario would be contradictory to the spirit of Article 14 of the Constitution of India.

"In such view of the matter, the requirement of having a passport has to be read as optional in Form III of the Citizenship Rules, 2009 and the authorities are deemed to have the power to relax such 6 requirement in the event the applicant satisfied the authorities for genuine reasons why the applicant is not in a position to produce such passport," the February 24 order said.

The court ruled that despite the provision of making applications online, a provision has to be made for persons who do not have all the particulars of their passport, which is read as optional, to file applications manually, which are to be treated as valid applications under Rule 5 of the Citizenship Rules, 2009.

The court also ordered that alternatively the necessary software be amended so that the online applications can be presented with or without passports, in the latter case furnishing detailed reasons as to non-furnishing of passports.

"Sanctioning of such forms, however, will be conditional upon the satisfaction of the relevant authorities about the reasons for the applicant not being able to produce her/his passport," the order said.