Will punish those who interfere in legal procurement of beef: Parrikar

Agencies
January 11, 2018

Panaji, Jan 11: In an apparent snub to 'gau rakshaks', Goa Chief Minister Manohar Parrikar on Monday said that if anybody who interferes in the legal import of beef would be punished.

He said this a day after meat traders in the state withdrew their strike called to protest harassment by cow vigilantes.

The beef traders called off their four-day-long strike yesterday, citing assurance by the police that they would not allow harassment of dealers who import beef from Belagavi in Karnataka at the state border. The strike had created the scarcity of beef in Goa.

The traders resorted to the protest after Gau Raksha Abhiyaan, a non-governmental organsiation, had allegedly targeted trucks carrying beef from Karnataka, claiming that animals are slaughtered in illegal slaughterhouses across the state border.

Supply from Karnataka

"I will see to it that if anyone interferes in the legal import (of beef), I will ensure that he is punished," the chief minister told reporters when asked about the incidents where vehicles carrying beef were stopped by cow vigilantes on the Goa-Karnataka border.

The slaughter houses in Karnataka had refused to supply meat till the Goa government took steps to stop the harassment by cow vigilante groups. Around 25 tonnes of beef is brought to Goa from Belagavi every day.

The chief minister said he had asked the police to go strictly by law.

"I have told police that they have to go by law. Legal provisions say that if there are documents and if there is proper billing, you cannot stop anyone from importing things," he said.

Legal documents

Parrikar said the police must check legal documents related to the commodity (beef) at the state border. "If everything is proper, no one should be allowed to interfere," he said in an oblique reference to the cow vigilante groups.

Comments

abbu
 - 
Thursday, 11 Jan 2018

IN GOA, KARNATAKA AND SOME OTHER STATES COW IS NOT MAATA. FOR EXPORT FROM INDIA TO OTHER COUNTRY AND FROM ONE STATE TO OTHER COW MEAT OR COW'S ARE NOT GOU-MATA. ONLY IF MUSLIMS USE FOR DAILY MEAL THEN ITS GOU-MATA.

 

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
June 2,2020

Tumkur, Jun 2: Karnataka Agriculture Minister BC Patil on Monday said that state will not be affected due to locust swarm as it has moved to other states.

"There will be no effect as locust insects diverted to other states after they came from Pakistan. We were also worried and were prepared to face it, luckily we will not be affected by insects," he said.

Locust is a type of grasshoppers and moves in large numbers and devastates crops. Several parts of Rajasthan including Ganganagar have reported locust attacks.

There is a prediction of another attack in June this year.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
July 25,2020

Gokak, Jul 25: A JMFC magistrate here issued summons to the Chief minister B S Yediyurappa in relation to a complaint for the alleged violation of election code of conduct, during by-elections to the Gokak Assembly seat held last year.

According to official sources, a complaint had been registered against Chief minister B S Yediyurappa during the election campaign, under the People Representative Act, for allegedly wooing voters during electioneering.

The Gokak Police, who had investigated the case, however had submitted a 'B' report to the court letting off the Chief minister from the charges.

However the Magistrate, rejecting the Police report, had maintained that there exists prima facie case against the accused and issued summons to appear before the court on September one, the sources added.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
February 19,2020

Bengaluru, Feb 19: Pointing out that there was a deliberate attempt to cover up police excesses by implicating innocent persons at whim, the Karnataka High Court on Tuesday granted conditional bail to 21 people who were accused by police of involving in violence during the protests against the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) in Mangaluru.

Allowing the bail petitions of Ashik and 20 others from Udupi and Dakshina Kannada districts, Justice John Michael Cunha said the overzealousness of the police is also evident from the fact that FIRs were registered under Section 307 of IPC against the persons killed by the police themselves.

“In an offence involving a large number of people, the identity and participation of each accused must be fixed with reasonable certainty. In the present cases, the identity appears to have been fixed on the basis of their affiliation to PFI and they being members of the Muslim community. Though it is stated that the involvement of the petitioners is captured in CCTV footage and photographs, no such material is produced before the court showing the presence of any of the petitioners at the spot, armed with deadly weapons,” the judge noted.

In the statement of objections filed by the State Public Prosecutor-I, it was stated that there was a hint of Muslim youths holding protest on December 19, 2019, opposing the implementation of CAA. Prohibitory orders were clamped in that connection. This assertion indicated that the common object of the assembly was to oppose the implementation of CAA and National Register for Citizens (NRC) which, by itself, was not an “unlawful object”, the judge pointed out.

‘Pics show cops throwing stones at crowd’

Justice Cunha also said the material collected by the investigators did not contain any specific evidence regarding the presence of any of the petitioners at the spot. On the other hand, omnibus allegations were made against the Muslim crowd of 1,500-2,000, alleging that they were armed with weapons like stones, soda bottles and glass pieces. The photographs produced by the SPP depicted that hardly any member of the crowd were armed with weapons, except one of them holding a bottle. In none of these photographs, police station or policemen were seen in the vicinity, the judge noted.

“On the other hand, photographs produced by the petitioners show that the policemen themselves were pelting stones at the crowd. The petitioners have produced copies of the complaints lodged by the dependants of the deceased who died due to police firing and the endorsement made thereon reveals that even though the law required the police to register independent FIRs in view of the specific complaint made against the police officers making out cognizable offences, the police have failed to register FIRs. This goes to show that a deliberate attempt is underway to cover up police excesses by implicating innocent persons at the whims and caprice of the police,” the judge observed.

In the wake of counter-allegations against the police and in the backdrop of their failure to register FIRs based on complaints lodged by the families of victims, the possibility of false and mistaken implication could not be ruled out, the judge said. In these circumstances, it would be a travesty of justice to deny bail to the petitioners and sacrifice their liberties to the mercy of the district administration and police. The records indicate that a deliberate attempt has been made to trump up evidence and to deprive the liberties of the petitioners by fabricating evidence. None of the petitioners have any criminal antecedents, the court said.

“The allegations levelled against the petitioners are not punishable with death or imprisonment for life. There is no direct evidence to connect them with the alleged offence. The investigation appears to be malafide and partisan. In the circumstances, in order to protect the rights and liberties of the petitioners, it is necessary to admit them to bail,” the judge said.

The petitioners were arrested and remanded in judicial custody after the anti-CAA protests on charges of being members of an unlawful assembly, armed with lethal weapons, attempting to set fire to the North Police Station in Mangaluru, obstructing the police from discharging their duties and causing damage to public property, etc., on December 19 in violation of the prohibitory orders. They moved the High Court as their bail pleas had been rejected by a sessions court in Dakshina Kannada.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.