Noted sports commentator M K Dharmaraja passes away

Bengaluru, Jul 11: The Bharatiya Janata Party led government of Karnataka is planning to ban cow slaughter as well as the sale and consumption of beef in the state by bringing Prevention of Cow Slaughter and Preservation Bill, 2012.

"Many states have passed the Anti-Cow Slaughter Bill. We are preparing to implement it in Karnataka as well. The state government will soon implement a ban on cow slaughter, sale and consumption of beef on the lines of many other states," said Prabhu Chauhan, the state's Animal Husbandry Minister.

The Anti-Cow Slaughter Act is already in place in several states like Gujarat, Delhi, Haryana, Maharashtra, Madhya Pradesh among others.

Last month, the Yogi Adityanath-led Uttar Pradesh government passed a draft ordinance to prevent cow slaughter, providing maximum rigorous imprisonment of 10 years and a fine up to Rs 5 lakh.
The Uttar Pradesh Cabinet Cow Slaughter Prevention (Amendment) Ordinance, 2020 aims at making the existing Uttar Pradesh Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act, 1955 more effective towards cow safety.

In Karnataka, the BJP-led government had promised to ban cow slaughter in its manifesto for 2018 state assembly election.

"The government will form a team of experts to look into once the current pandemic situation eases," Chauhan stated, adding that if necessary, the team of experts will visit states like Uttar Pradesh, Gujarat.

The then BS Yediyurappa-led BJP government had passed the Karnataka Prevention of Cow Slaughter and Protection Bill in 2010 but it failed to get presidential approval. Three years later, the Bill was withdrawn by the Siddaramaiah-led Congress government.

"I will discuss this matter with Chief Minister and if this pandemic situation eases, by next session, if not by upcoming assembly session, we will try to bring Karnataka Prevention of Slaughter and Preservation of Cattle Bill," Chauhan added.

Mumbai, Feb 26: Maharashtra cabinet minister and Congress leader Aslam Shaikh on Wednesday said that former chief minister Devendra Fadnavis made an irresponsible statement regarding the Shiv Sena-led state government's 'silence' on AIMIM leader Waris Pathan's remark. He added that as the incident took place in Karnataka, Fadnavis should ask Chief Minister BS Yediyurappa about the matter.

"This is an irresponsible statement given by Devendra Fadnavis. He should ask the same question to the Chief Minister of Karnataka where the statement was given," Shaikh said.

"Fadnavis should ask the same question to the Union Home Minister Amit Shah that why has he not been able to control the violence going on in Delhi," he added.

Earlier, on Tuesday, targeting Shiv Sena's silence over the recent controversial remark by Waris Pathan, Fadnavis said the Uddhav Thackeray-led party might be "wearing bangles" but the BJP was not and knew how to retaliate in the same manner.

"Shiv Sena might be wearing bangles but we are not. If someone says something then he will be given an answer in the same way. BJP has this much power," said Fadnavis while launching a scathing attack on ruling-Shiv Sena in Maharashtra for not taking strict action against Pathan.

On February 20, while addressing an anti-CAA rally, at Kalaburagi in Karnataka, Pathan had said, "Time has now come for us to unite and achieve freedom. Remember we are 15 crores but can dominate over 100 crores."

Bengaluru, Feb 19: Pointing out that there was a deliberate attempt to cover up police excesses by implicating innocent persons at whim, the Karnataka High Court on Tuesday granted conditional bail to 21 people who were accused by police of involving in violence during the protests against the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) in Mangaluru.

Allowing the bail petitions of Ashik and 20 others from Udupi and Dakshina Kannada districts, Justice John Michael Cunha said the overzealousness of the police is also evident from the fact that FIRs were registered under Section 307 of IPC against the persons killed by the police themselves.

“In an offence involving a large number of people, the identity and participation of each accused must be fixed with reasonable certainty. In the present cases, the identity appears to have been fixed on the basis of their affiliation to PFI and they being members of the Muslim community. Though it is stated that the involvement of the petitioners is captured in CCTV footage and photographs, no such material is produced before the court showing the presence of any of the petitioners at the spot, armed with deadly weapons,” the judge noted.

In the statement of objections filed by the State Public Prosecutor-I, it was stated that there was a hint of Muslim youths holding protest on December 19, 2019, opposing the implementation of CAA. Prohibitory orders were clamped in that connection. This assertion indicated that the common object of the assembly was to oppose the implementation of CAA and National Register for Citizens (NRC) which, by itself, was not an “unlawful object”, the judge pointed out.

‘Pics show cops throwing stones at crowd’

Justice Cunha also said the material collected by the investigators did not contain any specific evidence regarding the presence of any of the petitioners at the spot. On the other hand, omnibus allegations were made against the Muslim crowd of 1,500-2,000, alleging that they were armed with weapons like stones, soda bottles and glass pieces. The photographs produced by the SPP depicted that hardly any member of the crowd were armed with weapons, except one of them holding a bottle. In none of these photographs, police station or policemen were seen in the vicinity, the judge noted.

“On the other hand, photographs produced by the petitioners show that the policemen themselves were pelting stones at the crowd. The petitioners have produced copies of the complaints lodged by the dependants of the deceased who died due to police firing and the endorsement made thereon reveals that even though the law required the police to register independent FIRs in view of the specific complaint made against the police officers making out cognizable offences, the police have failed to register FIRs. This goes to show that a deliberate attempt is underway to cover up police excesses by implicating innocent persons at the whims and caprice of the police,” the judge observed.

In the wake of counter-allegations against the police and in the backdrop of their failure to register FIRs based on complaints lodged by the families of victims, the possibility of false and mistaken implication could not be ruled out, the judge said. In these circumstances, it would be a travesty of justice to deny bail to the petitioners and sacrifice their liberties to the mercy of the district administration and police. The records indicate that a deliberate attempt has been made to trump up evidence and to deprive the liberties of the petitioners by fabricating evidence. None of the petitioners have any criminal antecedents, the court said.

“The allegations levelled against the petitioners are not punishable with death or imprisonment for life. There is no direct evidence to connect them with the alleged offence. The investigation appears to be malafide and partisan. In the circumstances, in order to protect the rights and liberties of the petitioners, it is necessary to admit them to bail,” the judge said.

The petitioners were arrested and remanded in judicial custody after the anti-CAA protests on charges of being members of an unlawful assembly, armed with lethal weapons, attempting to set fire to the North Police Station in Mangaluru, obstructing the police from discharging their duties and causing damage to public property, etc., on December 19 in violation of the prohibitory orders. They moved the High Court as their bail pleas had been rejected by a sessions court in Dakshina Kannada.