UAE based NRI donates Rs 15 lakh for newborn tiger cubs in Mangaluru

Bengaluru, Jan 6: JD(S) leader H D Kumaraswamy on Monday said he would not get involved in any 'wicked act' of bringing down the B S Yediyurappa-led government in Karnataka, amid claims that 15 to 20 BJP MLAs were ready to come out.

Clarifying that he would not disturb the government, the former Chief Minister said for him, the development of the state was important. "With great difficulty, you (Yediyurappa) have become Chief Minister for the fourth time, (I am) happy, I have nowhere said that I will disturb your government. Even now some people come and ask why I'm sitting silent when 15-20 people are ready to come out of BJP and why don't I make an attempt (to poach them), Kumaraswamy said. Speaking to reporters in Hassan, he sought to know why he should get entangled in that 'sludge' and he was not in a hurry.

"I will not get involved in a wicked act of removing a responsible government like Yediyurappa did. For me the development of the state is important," he said.

Though Kumaraswamy had raised questions about the longevity of the BJP government ahead of the December 5 bypolls, he had even then given clear indications that he would not attempt to pull down the administration as it would affect the development of the state.

The ruling BJP had swept the by-elections by winning 12 of the total 15 seats, helping the Yediyurappa government retain the majority in the Assembly.

With BJP winning 12 of the 15 assembly constituencies, it's numbers went up from 105 (including an independent) to 117, which is well ahead of the halfway mark of 111 in a 223-member Assembly (two seats-- Maski and R R Nagar-- are vacant due to pending litigation in the High Court).

The BJP came to power after the Kumaraswamy-led Congress-JD(S) coalition government collapsed as 17 MLAs had rebelled against the alliance leadership and resigned as legislators, to later favour the saffron party.

Bengaluru, Apr 15: Police on Wednesday conducted surprise raids at nearly 120 shops in Bengaluru following complaints of black marketing and sale of foodgrains above the MRP rate.

Sandip Patil, Joint Commissioner of Police, Crime, Bengaluru in a tweet said that action has been initiated against these shopkeepers.

Though the government has maintained the supply chain of essential items, few shopkeepers have used the lockdown opportunity to charge higher prices for essential items.

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.