After SC intervenes, MCC issues Occupancy Certificate for Solitaire within a day

Bengaluru, Apr 8: Till date 181 COVID-19 positive cases have been confirmed in Karnataka including five deaths and 28 discharges, said State Government on Wednesday.

Six new positive cases have been reported from April 7, 5:00 PM to April 8, 12:00 noon, informed Karnataka Government in a bulletin.

Out of the six fresh cases one has been reported from Uttarakannada, two from Kalburgi, one from Mandya, one from Chikkaballapur and one from BBMP Bengaluru.

"In view of breaking the chain and containment of COVID-19, Karnataka State Board of Auqaf, Bengaluru has directed to all the managements not to allow any congregational prayers in the Masajid and the managements of the Qabrasthans (Muslim graveyards) / Darghas throughout the state and to suspend the visit of public on the occasion of SHAB-EBARAT on thursday, April 9," said State Government in its bulletin.

No public shall be allowed to perform religious rituals in the Qabrasthans/Darghas and all the gates of Qabrasthans/Darghas shall be kept closed.

All managements of Qabrasthans/Darghas shall take necessary action on the above directions and all Waqf officers, District Waqf Advisory Committee in state shall adhere to the orders and directed to circulate the same and to ensure the order is followed scrupulously, the State Government added.

India's tally of positive COVID-19 cases stands at 5,194, said the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare on Wednesday.

Out of the 5194 cases, 4,643 are reported to be active while 401 people have recovered or have been discharged and one has migrated. The death toll stands at 149.

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.

Bengaluru, Jan 3: The Karnataka high court on Thursday issued notices to the Railway Board and the South Western Railways on a petition seeking review of superfast surcharge being levied on passengers in Malgudi Express train.

Petitioner and Mysurubased advocate Mohammed Dastagir, in a public interest litigation claimed that as per the circular issued by the Railway Board on December 10, 2006, Malgudi Express — which runs from Mysuru to Yelehanka — is not designated as a superfast train and despite the same, the authorities are illegally collecting additional charges known as supplementary charges ranging from Rs 15 to Rs 75 from passengers.

A division bench headed by Chief Justice Abhay Shreeniwas Oka posted the petition to second week of February.