Tension in Andhra after hate-mongers kill Muazzin in mosque, burn Quran

Bengaluru, Feb 18: Passengers of the Ahmedabad bound GoAir flight had a providential escape when the engine of the aircraft while on the roll of take-off hit by a foreign object at the Kempe Gowda Bengaluru International Airport on Tuesday.

'The right engine of GoAir flight G8 802 from Ahmedabad to Bengaluru is suspected to have suffered from foreign object damage (FOD) while on take-off roll,' an official statement said.

Dubai: The father of a 16-year old girl who came on a visit visa to the UAE to visit him is desperate for help as she has been hospitalised, even as he has been rendered jobless.

On February 6, Amber D’Couto flew into Dubai from Mangaluru, India, along with her older sister, Alison, 19. The girls wanted to visit their dad Vivian D’Couto who was working in an automobile company at Jebel Ali.

The father was overjoyed to meet his girls until things took an ugly turn.

Two months into her stay, Amber fell seriously ill, even as D’Couto was served a termination letter by his company.

D’Couto said his daughter, a Grade 10 student, was perfectly healthly but suddenly developed high fever and began vomiting. She was rushed to a private hospital in Qusais which could not accommodate her because of the ongoing COVID-19 situation.

On April 30, she was admitted to another private hospital in the same area. After testing negative for COVID-19 thrice, she was diagnosed with acute pancreatis and Rheumatoid fever.

While the girl remains in hospital, the bill has spiralled to over Dh50,000, D’Couto said, adding that without a job now, he had no means to pay the huge amount.

“Amber is a very sweet child and a very bright student. She was living a very healthy life prior to coming to Dubai. But she is so ill now and under round-the-clock vigil in the ICU. The treatment for her condition is very specific and costly.”

A worried man, he said: “My daughter was on a visit visa and she had no insurance. We appeal to compassionate people to help us out in this difficult hour. Due to the current situation, I have lost my job and I am unable to pay for her medical expenses. Her condition has not stabilised yet and I am taking each day as it comes. I trust the doctors to help her recover, and we hope to be repatriated to India at the earliest so she can get further medical care.”

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.