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
Dears even if prophet (pbuh) did not ate beef ,never deneyed it to his rollovers ,what is halal and what is haram is clearly mentioned in Quran, but for a beliver its not compelsory to eat beef to prove his belief it permisable one like mutton and chicken or veg it depends upon the place, whether, biographical condition ,ect, here not only Muslims meeting beef people of,so many other religion also eating but only Hindus worshiping it this is fact ,,one more thing people of different parts of the world eetind beef since human eyes but problem begins only it created a vote bank ,,now real Hindus should prove what is real hinduism which permits to kill human for the name of cow? Still cow know nothing!!
CRAZY man half knowledge , makes him crazy to express wrong words
Dear CD
Don't support by publishing un islamic topic from so called Muslim (Nawzbillah)
Beware of such people,
Our bellowed prophet peace be upon him, said anybody who lies as misquoting against him, shall reserve their place in hell.
We should ask him for authenticated proof, sure he will fail to do so, then people have to decide his fate on the grounds of sharia law.
Better change your name to Tarak Mehta :-)
Hello, who is this Tarek Fatah, Agent of RSS, what he know about Prophet Swallahu Alaihi wa sallim. Where is quoted beef is Haram in Qur'an or Hadith.
What he is talking even not veda, purana, ramayana or in Mahabharatha there is no single word against slaughtering cow. 10000 of cows and other animal slaughter in yaaga, yajna.
Prophet Muhammed peace be upon him Told be aware of MUNAFIQs like you . and also mentioned that the day will come when Ignorant will become leaders ......so you try to become......you are going against ISLAM by claiming something Haram when its allowed in ISLAM
May be one day you will say PIG also allowed....!!!
Add new comment