Kasaragod, Jul 27: Seven persons belonging to two relative-families who attended a funeral recently had been tested positive for Coronavirus on Monday.
Sources said the two families had been to Thavinjal near here for the funeral of a man who died at the Kozhikode Medical College Hospital on July 19.
Later, the samples of these seven persons were sent for testing after they developed symptoms of COVID-19, the result of which came out on Monday.
Bengaluru, Jun 3: Kempegowda International Airport in Bengaluru on Tuesday intensified preventive measures to contain the spread of COVID-19 in a bid to make air-travel contactless.
The airport has introduced contact-less self-check-in kiosks, non-intrusive thermal cameras, self bag drop facility and other features.
Bangalore International Airport Limited (BIAL) had earlier said that it will ensure that the taxis are sanitised and the drivers are screened before every trip to eliminate all chances of infection.
"Drivers have been instructed to maintain a safe distance. They will be encouraged to use hand sanitiser and face masks to make the car a safe space. Able-bodied passengers are advised to load their luggage into the car without the driver's assistance. For elderly citizens and passengers with reduced mobility, drivers will assist while following hygiene measures," BIAL statement had said.
The masks have been made mandatory for both drivers as well as passengers.
Karnataka on Monday reported 187 new cases of coronavirus, with which the State's total COVID-19 count has surged to 3,408.
Bengaluru, July 22: Complete lockdown on Sundays and daily night curfew would continue across Karnataka to contain the coronavirus spread, a top officia.
"Though lockdown will be lifted from 5 am on Wednesday across the state, night curfew will continue daily from 9 pm to 5 am to restrict movement of people and vehicles. Total lockdown on Sundays will also continue on July 26 and August 2," said state Chief Secretary T.M. Vijaya Bhaskar in an order here.
The order to unlock Bengaluru and four other districts - Dakshina Kannada, Dharwad, Kalaburagi and Kodagu, which have been under 7-9 day lockdown since March 14 night came after Chief Minister B.S. Yediyurappa declared that lockdowns would not be re-imposed across the state hereafter.
Besides restrictions in containment areas to control the virus spread, the order banned reopening of gyms and prevented use of benches in parks by walkers or joggers.
"All vegetable and fruit markets in cities and towns across the state will be shifted to the suburbs or outskirts to decongest them and prevent crowding," said the order in Kannada.
Wearing mask, sanitising hands and maintaining social distancing will be strictly enforced and violators will be fined.
Suburban train and metro services will continue to remain shut till further orders.
Select long-distance express trains will continue to operate as per the standard operating procedure given by the Union Ministry of Home Affairs on May 30.
"State-run and private buses in cities and on intra-state and inter-state routes will operate with limited number of passengers to ensure physical distancing. All buses will be sanitized and fumigated after every trip," said the order.
Schools, colleges, cinema theatres, multiplexes will remain shut to prevent crowding and violation of social distancing.
Ban on religious functions and mass gatherings will also continue.
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.
Comments
Add new comment