Vande Mataram now mandatory in all schools, universities, offices in TN

Bengaluru, May 18: Over two months after his appointment as the Karnataka Congress President, DK Shivakumar is likely to take-over the reigns of the party officially on May 31.

"There are two dates, May 31 and June 7. He is most likely to officially take over as KPCC President on the 31st," sources close to Mr Shivakumar told PTI.

After remaining in a virtual vacuum for nearly three months, the party high command on March 11 appointed Mr Shivakumar, known to be the Congress' chief troubleshooter in crisis situations, replacing Dinesh Gundu Rao as KPCC chief.

Mr Rao had quit the post in December 2019 after the party's dismal show in the bypolls when it won only two of the 15 seats and yielded 12.

Congress sources said once the appointment letter came from the high command, he has been KPCC president and officially taking charge was just a formality.

"He will be officially handed over the party insignias and responsibilities relating to bank accounts and cheques, among other things, that has been traditionally followed," they said, adding the official take over was delayed by the coronavirus.

After his appointment as KPCC president, Mr Shivakumar has been meeting a host of senior party leaders and leading the party in the fight against coronavirus.

These include setting up of Congress' COVID-19 task force, alerting the government in its management of the crisis, holding weekly video conferencing with leaders of party's local units to gather information, among other things.

Sources close to Mr Shivakumar said the official take over would be a simple event, looking at the current situation due to the pandemic.

"Very few select party leaders and office bearers, say about 50 odd people, are likely to be in attendance at the simple event at KPCC office," they said, adding that arrangements may be made to telecast the event live for the benefit for party workers and local leaders.

A six-time MLA, Mr Shivakumar had a long wait for his appointment to the coveted post, due to opposition within. There were reports that Congress Legislature Party leader Siddarmaiah had lobbied in favour of one of his confidants for the top job.

In a first, appointment of three KPCC Working Presidents- Satish Jharkiholi, Saleem Ahammed and Eashwar Khandre, was seen as an attempt by those apposing Mr Shivakumar, to weaken his hold on the party.

Madikeri, Jan 16: Income Tax Department officials on Thursday raided the residence of Kannada actress Rashmika Mandanna at Virajpet in Kodagu District on Thursday.

About 10 IT officials arrived at the residence on Thursday at about 1930 hrs and started searching. The officials have been busy conducting the raid for more than three hours now.

I-T sources said that the search and seizure operations were conducted on suspicion that Rashmika Mandanna had evaded taxes.

Mandanna, 23, is a leading heroine and has acted in several Kannada and Telugu films over the last four years. Her most recent film Sarileru Neekevvaru opposite Mahesh Babu is in the theatres now.

She made her debut in Sandalwood with the film Kirik Party, which was a huge success at the box office. She went on to act in several Kannada and Telugu films in the last two years and has become a huge success in the industry. She has acted in Dear Comrade, Sarileru Neekevvaru, Chalo, Geeta Govindam, Chamak, Yajamana, Anjani Putra and Vritra.

She is currently working in the film Pogaru alongside Dhruva Sarja. She has acted in nine movies in the last two years and has also signed several advertising contracts.

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.