Puttur court quasheshate speech' case against PFI leaders, Rajashekhar

Kannur, Jan 23: A member of Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh has been arrested for attempting to create unrest in Kerala by hurling crude bombs at RSS office and police picket. The miscreants had reportedly planned to pass the blame on others.

The bomb attack took place of January 16 in Kerala’s Kannur. The accused Prabesh, an RSS hardliner, was arrested from Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu.

According to the Kerala police Prabesh hurled steel bombs towards the police picket in front of Kathirur Manoj Smrithi Kendram, an RSS office.

"He threw bombs during the wee hours of January 16 morning. Following the arrest he has confessed that his aim was RSS office. Kannur, being politically sensitive region, any attack on political party offices will be regarded as an act by the opponent," Kathirur SI Nijeesh said.

"We had a police picket in the region for a few months now. We are assuming he wanted to create unrest in the area by removing the police from the spot. We could contain the situation because of the CCTV visuals. He was identified immediately after the incident. Following the attack he went to Coimbatore and was hiding there. Our team nabbed him from Coimbatore," he said.

The police have also said that the accused Prabesh had many criminal cases pending against him including those under Explosive Substances Act, 1883. He was nabbed by a team lead by Kathirur SI Nijeesh, CPO Rohith and Vijeesh.

The RSS office in the region is named after Kathirur Manoj a senior karyakarta (worker) who was allegedly killed by the CPI(M) activists in 2014. Kathirur Manoj was the prime accused in the attempt to murder of senior CPI(M) leader P Jayarajan in 1999.

Bengaluru, Apr 28: A local court in Karnataka on Tuesday granted bail to a CRPF commando who was arrested by state police officials for alleged assault on them during COVID-19 lockdown duty, a charge contested strongly by the paramilitary.

The jawan has been taken to the jungle warfare training school of the paramilitary force in Belagavi district, a senior official said.

Constable Sachin Savant of the 207th CoBRA battalion was granted regular bail by a court located in Chikodi taluka of the district, he said.

A team of CRPF and CoBRA officials were present in the court during the proceeding during which the state police did not oppose the bail, the official said.

The commando was arrested by police on April 23 from Examba village (Belagavi district) when he was washing his bike outside his house without wearing a mask, as required under the coronavirus prevention protocol.

An altercation and physical fight took place between the two sides, following which the trooper was taken to the local police station and arrested.

The Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) had on Monday taken up the case with the Karnataka director general of police (DGP), calling the incident "unpleasant".

The CRPF letter said commando Savant was "manhandled, ill-treated, paraded to the police station barefooted, kept in chains and handcuffs" by police personnel and sought the intervention of state Director General of Police Praveen Sood.

The paramilitary had said that from the scrutiny of a viral video on social media of the incident "it is apparent that the conduct of the police personnel was not citizen-centric".

A police report had said the CoBRA commando "started the altercation" with the beat constable and another policeman accompanying him, and "assaulted" them.

As per the official Twitter handle of the Karnataka DGP's on Monday evening, "IGP (inspector-general of police) Belagavi has been asked to enquire into the incident involving the CRPF constable and action will be taken against guilty after receipt of the report".

The Commando Battalion for Resolute Action (CoBRA) unit of the CRPF specialises in guerrilla tactics and jungle warfare.

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.