Spin legend Shane Warne bitten by anaconda in TV show

Bengaluru, Jan 10: Barely 24 hours after the standoff between BJP workers and students of Jyoti Nivas College (JNC) in Bengaluru over CAA became breaking news, it took political hues with the saffron party and the Congress locking horns over the issue.

Taking the battle to the anti-CAA camp on Thursday, the BJP aggressively defended its party workers, who on Wednesday erected a pro-CAA banner on the college compound wall and allegedly forced students to sign on it as a mark of support.

With one of the workers who had locked horns with JNC students by his side, deputy chief minister CN Ashwath Narayan, at his official residence, questioned students’ right to protest party cadre erecting a pro-CAA banner on their college compound wall.

“How can you tell people not to create awareness about a law that has been passed in this country? Who gave students the right to question political workers? If there was anything wrong, let them report to the police,” retorted the minister, who also holds the higher education department portfolio.

On the other hand, the Congress, cashing in on simmering anger over the assault on JNU students in Delhi, used the JNC standoff to project the ruling party as prime culprits in stifling the voice of students. BTM Layout MLA and seasoned politician R Ramalinga Reddy even warned the BJP against “allowing JNC to become another JNU”.

Reddy met with the JNC administration and extended his support against any “threats” to students. It is being alleged that Reddy was the first to “leak” the video of Wednesday’s row to the media. The college falls in his assembly constituency.

Taking a cue from his colleague’s stand, former CM and opposition leader Siddaramaiah also leaned into the matter and sent a strong message “backing” students in the standoff. “BJP goons are threatening students of Jyotinivas College to support CAA. MrYediyurappa, I am strictly warning you to control hooligans from your party. Don't subvert knowledge & institutions for your selfish motives. We won't let Ktaka to be victim of your Hitler rule!” said Siddaramaiah in a tweet.

Mangaluru, June 21: A local court has held notorious serial killer Cyanide Mohan Kumar guilty in the murder of a 25-year-old woman from Kasargod. This is the 20th and the last case of Cyanide Mohan to be tried in the sixth additional district and sessions court. 

According to public prosecutor Jayarama Shetty, the victim was working as a cook in a ladies hostel and got in touch with Mohan Kumar, a teacher. He visited her house thrice and promised to marry her. On July 8, 2009, on the pretext of visiting a temple in Sullia, she left home, never to return. 

They had travelled to Bengaluru and three days later, when her family tried to reach her on phone, he told them that she had gone for a bath and that they were married and would be returning back home soon.

The next day Ramakrishna, a constable from Upparpete police station, found a lady lying unconscious outside the bathroom and he immediately rushed her to a local hospital, where she was declared dead on arrival. Like in all other cases, after staying in a lodge and having sex with the victim, he took her to the KSRTC bus stand and asked her to consume a cyanide laced tablet, stating it was a contraceptive pill. 

He asked her to leave behind the jewellery that she was wearing at the hotel room. An unnatural death report was registered and since none of her relatives had turned up for identification of the body, on July 15,2009 the body was buried.

The moment the Dakshina Kannada district police arrested the serial killer on October 21, 2009 and his pictures were all over the media, the family recognised him and the victim’s younger sister filed a missing complaint. The police had also recovered the victim’s jewellery from the house of Mohan’s second wife and the jeweller from whom he had purchased cyanide had also identified him. Meanwhile, the CID had taken over the case and a charge sheet was filed.

"The report from the Forensic Science Laboratory is crucial in this case as cyanide was found in the victim’s viscera. Mohan over the years has become a legal expert and in this case, he had sought two adjournments," said Jayaram Shetty. Mohan is currently lodged in the Hindalga central jail.
 

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.