Grand welcome for Special Olympics medalist

Bengaluru, Feb 12: Mohammed Nalapad, the rogue son of Karnataka Congress leader NA Harris, who is out on bail in a 2018 case of him bashing up a man at a pub, has now rammed his luxury car into vehicles, injuring four people on Bengaluru road.

The incident took place on Sunday on the Ballari Road where Nalapad was rash driving his car. The car hit a biker and an autorickshaw, injuring four people. He immediately got off his car and fled riding a friend's car.

The biker has suffered a fracture in his leg and is undergoing treatment at a hospital.

According to police, soon after the accident a man appeared before police to claim responsibility for the accident.

Ravikante Gowde, Joint Commissioner of Police said, "A man named Balakrishna came to surrender as the one who was driving the car. Investigation has, however, showed that it was Nalapad who was driving when he met with the accident. The investigating officer has issued him a notice to appear before the police."

BJP spokesperson S Prakash has said, "A case under the Goonda Act should be filed against Nalapad and the court should take cognisance of this and cancel his bail. The father has no control over son. He is a serial offender who is harming the public on a repeated basis."

Nalapad was earlier arrested in 2018 in the Bengaluru pub incident in which he and his associate bashed up the son of a prominent businessman in the city. Nalapad Harris is out on bail after remaining in judicial custody for three months in the case of attempt to murder after the 2018 midnight brawl.

Bengaluru, Mar 30: The nationwide lockdown has left the state on the brink of a fresh agrarian crisis.

The lack of transport facilities spells doom for ready-to-harvest grapes worth Rs 500-600 crore in Bengaluru Rural, Chikkaballapur and Kolar districts. Unable to find buyers, several farmers have begun dumping their produce into compost pits.

On Sunday, Munishamappa, a farmer in Chikkaballapur, emptied four truckloads of grapes into the pit as buyers didn’t turn up due to the lockdown. “If the grapes wither and fall to the ground, it will affect the soil’s fertility and I will be forced to dispose of them,” he said.

Venkata Krishnappa, Munishamappa’s son, said their 1.5-acre vineyard yielded 25 tonnes of grapes. “Just before the lockdown, 10 tonnes were harvested and delivered to the market. Due to lack of transport, buyers haven’t turned up for the remaining 15 tonnes which we are dumping into the pit.”

For latest updates on coronavirus outbreak, click here

Anjaneya Reddy, a farmer leader, said that in Chikkaballapur alone, they have cultivated grapes on 2,000 acres. “Even if you consider 15 tonnes per acre as yield, there are about 30,000 tonnes ready to be harvested in the district. At a market rate of Rs 50 to Rs 60 per kilogram, the net worth will be Rs 200 crore to Rs 300 crore. And if you consider the crop in Kolar and Bengaluru Rural, grapes worth Rs 500 to Rs 600 crore are at stake,” he explained.

The ‘Dilkush’ grapes is the most preferred variety of domestic consumption, according to the farmers.

This apart, farmers would have invested about Rs 3 lakh to 4 lakh per acre on fertilisers, pesticide and labour. “With markets being shut and no of the transport facilities available, farmers are forced to dump their produce into pits. It is high time the government intervened and provided us with market options so that farmers can sell at an affordable price of Rs 30 to 40,” Reddy said.

Somu, a farmer in Ganjam village of Srirangapattana, dumped two tonnes of chikku (sapota) citing market shutdown in Mandya. Reddy appealed to the government to emulate the Maharashtra model where the government is helping farmers market fruits through Hopcoms or dairy units as nutrient supplements to people.

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.