Young techie working in the U.S. ends life over job security fear

Bengaluru, Apr 9: 10 new positive cases have been confirmed in Karnataka, apart from the recent fatality of an 80-year-old woman from Gadag district, the health department said on Thursday.

The fresh cases have been reported in the state from last evening to Thursday noon.

Till date, 191 COVID-19 positive cases have been confirmed, which includes 6 deaths and 28 discharges, the update said.

Among the 10 positive cases, eight are contacts of patients who have already tested positive- one each from Belagavi, Mandya and Chikkaballapura, two from Mysuru, and three from Bagalkote; while two from Bengaluru city are with a travel history to Delhi.

Three cases from Bagalkote are children- two boys of 4 and 13 years of age, and one girl of 9 years old.

The elderly woman died on April 8 in Gadag, the department said in its mid-day situation update.

Confirming that her reports tested positive on April 7, officials had said, she had a history of Severe Acute Respiratory Infection (SARI).

Mangaluru, Jan 9: Customs officials seized 1.575 kg gold, worth about, Rs 63 lakh from three passengers who arrived from Dubai here at Mangalore International Airport on Thursday.

Official sources said that in the first incident, three days back gold weighing 336.7 grams was found in possession of an inbound air passenger. The passenger who arrived by Air India flight from Dubai had concealed the gold in his socks. The value of the seized gold is estimated to be Rs 13.43 lakh.

In the other two instances that took place on January 7, gold weighing 1239 gram and worth about Rs 50.3 lakh was confiscated from two passengers who arrived from Dubai by Air India flight. One of the passengers had attempted to smuggle 523 gram gold in paste form.

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.