Two killed in gang attack at Farangipet; three others injured

Bengaluru, May 12: People returning to Karnataka from other states will have to remain in quarantine">institutional quarantine even if they are asymptomatic, according to Department of Health and Family Welfare Services, Government of Karnataka

"All persons returning to Karnataka from any State, symptomatic or asymptomatic shall be kept in quarantine">institutional quarantine," read an order issued by the State Health and Family Welfare Services.

It further read, "For persons claiming to come from Goa, Deputy Commissioner of receiving district should verify and in the event of adequate capacity not being available, can put them in home quarantine for a period of 14 days, if the claim regarding the origin state is confirmed."

"Deputy Commissioner/Special Commissioner, BBMP will fix the rates for hotels where such returnees will be staying on a payment basis," the statement read.

Mumbai, Feb 26: Maharashtra cabinet minister and Congress leader Aslam Shaikh on Wednesday said that former chief minister Devendra Fadnavis made an irresponsible statement regarding the Shiv Sena-led state government's 'silence' on AIMIM leader Waris Pathan's remark. He added that as the incident took place in Karnataka, Fadnavis should ask Chief Minister BS Yediyurappa about the matter.

"This is an irresponsible statement given by Devendra Fadnavis. He should ask the same question to the Chief Minister of Karnataka where the statement was given," Shaikh said.

"Fadnavis should ask the same question to the Union Home Minister Amit Shah that why has he not been able to control the violence going on in Delhi," he added.

Earlier, on Tuesday, targeting Shiv Sena's silence over the recent controversial remark by Waris Pathan, Fadnavis said the Uddhav Thackeray-led party might be "wearing bangles" but the BJP was not and knew how to retaliate in the same manner.

"Shiv Sena might be wearing bangles but we are not. If someone says something then he will be given an answer in the same way. BJP has this much power," said Fadnavis while launching a scathing attack on ruling-Shiv Sena in Maharashtra for not taking strict action against Pathan.

On February 20, while addressing an anti-CAA rally, at Kalaburagi in Karnataka, Pathan had said, "Time has now come for us to unite and achieve freedom. Remember we are 15 crores but can dominate over 100 crores."

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.