PM Modi's words are worth nothing, hits out Siddaramaiah

Bengaluru, Jul 15: Karnataka Pradesh Congress Committee President D K Shivakumar on Tuesday alleged Chief Minister B S Yediyurappa led state government of corruption and said it had not spared even beds and pillows meant for COVID-19 patients to make "corrupt" money.

Taking to microblogging site Twitter, Congress leader said BJP government will be exposed in the coming days.

"It is nauseating that @BSYBJP govt has not even spared the beds and pillows meant for CoVid patients to make corrupt money from. There are many such scams involving ministers. Evidences about them will be placed before people and the BJP Govt will be exposed in the coming days," he tweeted.

Cabinet minister Jagadish Shettar on Monday announced a complete lockdown in Karnataka's Dharwad area from 10 am on July 15 to 8 pm on July 24 in a bid to control the rising number of COVID-19 cases.

According to the State's health department, Karnataka has a total of 41,581 positive cases so far, including 24,572 active cases and 16,248 recoveries.

So far, 757 people have lost their lives to coronavirus in the State.

Bengaluru, Jan 9: Some BJP workers created a ruckus on Wednesday at a college here while seeking support for the amended Citizenship Act by raising slogans like 'Go back to Pakistan' outside the campus on Wednesday, as girl students opposed a pro-CAA banner on the wall of their institution.

A video of the incident went viral on social media.

A group of BJP workers, supporters of local party leader M M Govindaraj, had put up a poster "India Supports CAA" on the wall of Jyothi Nivas College near Koramangala.

This was opposed by girl students, who said they would not allow any such poster to be put up on the college property.

The BJP workers then tried to shout down the students.

"You are not concerned about citizenship, you are concerned about yourself. You should be concerned about India first. You are not an Indian then," a BJP worker is heard screaming at the girls in the video.

They also questioned the students if they had valid reasons to oppose the Citizenship Amendment Act and sought to know whether they wanted an argument or a debate.

The BJP workers purportedly told the girls that they were only the students of the college and not the owner.

"What's your problem madam with the CAA? Are you the owner of the college?" they asked.

Amid the heated argument, the BJP workers resorted to sloganeering like 'We want CAA' and "Go back to Pakistan', as seen in another video shot by the students.

BTM Layout Congress MLA Ramalinga Reddy visited the college on Thursday after learning about the incident and spoke to its management.

Later, he told reporters that the campus should not be allowed for any political activities.

"Any signature campaign whether in favor or against it (CAA) should be done outside the campus," Reddy said.

He cautioned the pro-CAA protesters he will not let any violent incidents like the one at Jawaharlal Nehru University in New Delhi happen at the city college.

Reddy's daughter Sowmya Reddy, who is the Jayanagar MLA, tweeted, "A few videos & photos of outside #JyotiNivascollege are being circulated on social media."

"MLA Ramalinga Reddy & I have spoken to cops and the Prinicipal about this incident. Spoke to DCP South East Bengaluru and she said that Koramangala cops went there immediately & they are picketing even now," she added.

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.