Why Mangaluru ignored under Vande Bharat Mission?

Dubai, Jun 9: A young NRI engineer in Dubai, who supported his pregnant spouse to file a plea in the Supreme Court of India for early repatriation from the UAE amid the coronavirus lockdown passed away in his sleep of suspected cardiac arrest.

The deceased identified as Nithin Chandran (28) and his wife Athira Geetha Sreedharan (27) had hit headlines in the past after the latter filed a writ petition seeking assistance to be repatriated to India, following the suspension of flights to the country, as she was due for the delivery of their first baby in the first week of July.

Chandran, a mechanical engineer was working at a construction firm in Dubai. According to the reports, he had stayed back in UAE after sending his wife home on the first day of repatriation from Dubai on May 7 under the Vande Bharat Mission.

The deceased was receiving the treatment for high blood pressure and a heart condition and is suspected to have died of a heart attack while asleep, his friend said. However, the exact cause of his death is yet to be known.

Bengaluru, Jan 18: The government slammed Kerala’s tourism department for putting out a tweet on Sankranti Day, promoting ‘beef ularthiyathu’, a specialty in that state, but the move backfired spectacularly with Karnataka’s tourism minister being heavily trolled.

After Kerala put out its advertisement, state tourism minister CT Ravi, seizing the opportunity, took a dig at the Left government in Kerala, saying, “Welcome to Karnataka”. He followed that up with another tweet listing delicious “vegetarian” dishes of coastal Karnataka — a coastline which runs to Kerala.

“Welcome to Karnataka to bring out the Vegetarian in you. Enjoy the flavors of Tulu Nadu – Pathrode, Kotte Kadubu, Halasina Hannina Gatti, Avalakki Upkari, Badanekayi Mosaru Gojju and a whole lot of authentic food to hit Your tastebuds,” Ravi’s tweet read.

Ravi’s tweet sparked a debate between those for and against eating beef, including legislators like Sowmya Reddy (Congress) and Shobha Karandlaje (BJP). Some pointed out that Karnataka is 80% non-vegetarian and an appropriate response to beef curry would have been “pandi curry” (wild pig curry) — a Kodagu specialty.

Realising his tweets were getting more negative than positive traction, Ravi quickly amended his stand and on Friday tweeted: “Nati Koli Saaru Mudde. Aw! Delightful Delicacy of Old Mysuru region. Farm bred Chicken traditionally cooked to perfection and served with the soft Ragi Mudde. You will ask for more !!!”

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.