Passport appointments extended at Mangalore Passport Seva Kendra

Bengaluru, Feb 17: Union Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman on Monday assured that the Centre is committed to stand by its promise of providing Rs 18,600 crore Bengaluru suburban Rail project.

Addressing a press conference after a post-budget interactive session with the representatives of the various trade bodies, industry leaders and others here, she said that the union cabinet has already given its clearance for the long-pending project.

Informing that the central government will have 20 per cent of its capital share in the project followed by another 20 per cent share from the state government, she said "beside this, the union government will stand for a sovereign guarantee for the rest of the 60 percent share, which can be raised through loans from external agencies".

Bengaluru, May 8: Karnataka Chief Minister BS Yediyurappa on Friday held a meeting with opposition parties at his office here over COVID-19 situation in the state.

Former Chief Minister Siddaramaiah, Congress leaders SR Patil and DK Shivakumar participated in the meeting. From Janata Dal (Secular), former Chief Minister HD Kumaraswamy and HD Revanna were present.

"Congress legislative party leader Siddaramaiah and DK Shivkumar have arranged the Chief Minister to request the central government to announce a special package of Rs 50,000 crore to Karnataka to fight coronavirus and also special packages requested for small and medium scale industries," said Siddaramaiah's media secretary.

Meanwhile, Yediyurappa has announced a special package for those involved in leather works, especially those who work on the roadside.

The special package has been announced for cobblers and leather workers, who work on the roadside.

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.