Sriram Sene wants action on youth for Facebook post

Mangaluru, Jan 18: Congress leader Siddaramaiah targeted Union Home Minister Amit Shah soon after he arrived in Bengaluru on Saturday, demanding his answers on various questions pertaining to the state.

In a slew of tweets under the #AnswerMadiShah banner, Siddaramaiah raised issues ranging from the August 2019 floods to the recent police shootout in Mangaluru that killed two people during an anti-CAA protest.

On December 19, Jaleel (45) and Nausheen (24) were killed after the police opened fire during a protest against the CAA.

“Two innocent victims were killed in Mangaluru in what public opinion says that it is a fake encounter. You are the Home Minister of the country. Don't you think adequate investigation has to take place when people cry foul about the incident?” Siddaramaiah asked.

He further asked: “Mr Amit Shah, before investing time to brainwash people to accept your divisive policies, why don't you visit flood-affected areas again and assess if the Central government funds  are sufficient or not?”

The Congress leader pointed out that Chief Minister BS Yediyurappa had claimed that Karnataka suffered losses of over Rs 35,000 crore due to the floods. “But your aid is just Rs 1,870 crore. When are you planning to give the remaining? Will there be any funds left after the implementation of CAA, NPR & NRC?” he added.

The former chief minister brought up the Mahadayi river water sharing dispute. It may be recalled that Shah, in the run-up to the Karnataka Assembly elections in 2018, had promised a resolution to the dispute within six months if BJP was voted to power in the state.

“Mr. Amit Shah, your colleagues give contradictory statements on the initiation of Mahadayi project. Why is there a change in stance after elections? What is your stand on the issue,” Siddaramaiah asked.

Mangaluru, Apr 22: Iftar parties, Taraweeh and weekly Friday prayers in mosques have been banned in the district during Ramadan amid Coronavirus theat, Dakshina Kannada Deputy Commissioner Sindhu B Rupesh said here on Wednesday.

In a release issued here, she said, “As per the guidelines issued by the State government and Wakf Board, arranging Iftar gathering, and offering Taraveeh Namaz and Friday Namaz at mosques or dargas during the month of Ramadan has been prohibited as a precaution measure to prevent the spread of coronavirus. Therefore, offer prayers at homes instead of going to mosques," the DC said.

“No one can perform Namaz in the mosques except the muezzin and the Pesh imam and the staff of the mosque. Also, gathering neighbors and offering collective prayers at anybody's home is also not allowed. Masjid administration committees must follow the directives of the government, Wakf Board and the District Administration”, the DC urged.

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.