Annual Rotary quiz contest on Dec 30

Udupi, Jun 20: The wife and daughter of a 54-year-old man who succumbed to Covid-19, tested positive for the virus on Saturday.

Sources said that the family returned to Udupi on June 18 and the man died the same day while his wife and daughter tested positive today.

The man and his family had arrived at their house in Thekkatte on Thursday, June 18 afternoon. Later in the day, the man died. He was suffering from jaundice and had arrived from Mumbai in the state of illness.

Bengaluru, May 24:The first 'Sunday curfew' imposed by the Karnataka government to try and contain the spread of COVID-19 got underway in the state today, with people by and large adhering to norms, roads wearing a deserted look and almost no vehicular traffic, barring essential services.

With barricades being up across most roads in the state, people ventured out only to purchase groceries, vegetabes and medicines.

Instances of violation of Sunday curfew lockdown norms were reported in COVID-19 hotspots of Shivajinagar and Rayapura in Bengaluru and Nelamangala and Devanahalli.

Temples, malls, bars, eateries and small food joints remained shut throughout state.

In most parts of the state buses, autorickshaws and cabs did not ply.

In Bengaluru, the ever bustling Majestic area, which houses the central city bus stand, inter-city bus stand, Metro Railway Station and the City Railway Station, did not see any activity as buses did not ply and all shops were shut, police said.

Reports from Mysuru, Tumakuru, Kolar, Mangaluru, Udupi and other towns across the state said there were no lockdown violations.

Amid the rigid curfew marriages were conducted in a simple manner in various parts of the state like Gollarahatti and Yashwanthapura in Bengaluru and also in Davangere.

Families of the brides and grooms invited only a few people for the event, adhered to social distancing norms and wore masks.

In Gollarahatti, the event organisers cleaned the road, after which the invitees, who were hardly 25 to 30 in number, sat down to have a feast.

The Karnataka government had eased restrictions during Lockdown 4 for start of economic activities like city buses, inter-district bus service, intrastate train services, opening of shops and markets.

However, the government had made it clear that there will be 'Janata Curfew' every Sunday during which only essential services would be permitted.

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.