Raghavendra Kini is the new chairman of Udupi Urban Development Authority

Mangaluru, July 10: Five people including four policemen suffered injuries following a clash at Melkar in Bantwal taluk of Dakshina Kannada district last night.

Abdul Salam, 29, a resident of Goltamajalu near Kalladka, was arrested on charge of attacking policemen. He was also attacked by the cops on the spot. Currently he is undergoing treatment at a hospital.

According to sources, Abdul Salam and another person were quarrelling with lorry drivers on the highway. A couple of policemen including ASI Shailesh, who were on patrol, intervened.

This led to a clash between cops and Abdul Salam, who reportedly snatched the baton from a cop and hit the men in khaki, eye witnesses said.

However, police sources claimed that Abdul Salam was holding an iron road and he thrashed policemen with the rod.

Meanwhile, more policemen reached the spot and thrashed the accused before arresting him.

Police sources said ASI Shailesh, HC Devappa and PCs Niranjan and Malik were injured in the incident. The policemen were treated the government hospital in Bantwal.

Abdul Salam, who suffered critical injuries, was taken to a private hospital in Mangaluru after preliminary treatment.

A case was registered against him in the Bantwal Town Police Station under section 353, 504, 506, 332, 307, 427 IPC, and 2 A Karnataka Prevention of Destruction of Public Property Act.

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.

Mangaluru, Jul 24: Parents in Dakshina Kannada are urging the educational institutions to reduce fees at least by 75% as most of the infrastructure and resources are not being utilized due to online classes. 

“School campuses are now closed. Why we have to pay such a heavy fee when our children are not availing the facilities offered on campus?” asks a Sapna (name changed), a parent, whose two daughters study at a prestigious private school in Mangaluru.  

Even though some schools considered as small players have reduced fees, most of the “prestigious” institutions in the Mangaluru have so far refused to give any discount.

“Apart from paying school fees, now we have to invest in gadgets, internet connections and accessories required for online classes. School administration can use their infrastructure and facilities for other purposes as students are not utilizing them. Hence, they must give us maximum discount during this pandemic,” said another parent.  
 
On the other hand, many parents are facing a dire financial situation due to covid-19 lockdown – while some have suffered losses in their business some have lost their jobs.

Many parents have even approached the education department to ensure that they get a discount in fees from educational institutions, said Dakshina Kannada DDPI Malleswamy.

“We cannot do anything since a government circular has asked educational institutions not to hike fees, which they have not done, and reduce fees if possible, which will never happen. The department is acting against only those schools that forcefully collect fees,” the DDPI said.