Ambareesh wants JD(S) govt in Karnataka: H D Kumaraswamy

Bengaluru, Jul 16: Amid difficulties being faced by COVID-19 patients in getting beds, the Karnataka government on Wednesday made bed allocation display board mandatory in all hospitals registered under Karnataka Private Medical Establishment (KPME).

"It is made mandatory that all hospitals registered under KPME in Karnataka State should display at the reception counter, a bed allocation display board," a notification issued by the state government read.

"It should display the name of the hospital, the total number of beds (as per of KPME registration) and the total number of beds allocated for COVID-19 patients referred by Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP)," it said.

The notification further stressed that the data must corroborate with the data of the central bed allocation system of BBMP. The display board should be arranged by July 16.

Non-compliance to the order issued by the state government will attract punishment under relevant sections of the Disaster Management Act 2005 and Indian Penal Code, the order read.

The state government on June 23 issued a notification making it mandatory to reserve 50 per cent of the beds in private hospitals to treat COVID-19 patients referred by public health authorities.

Bengaluru, Mar 30: Army personnel on Sunday distributed food packets and other essential items to the needy and sprayed Calcium Hypochlorite solution in Koramangala and Vanarpet areas amid the coronavirus lockdown.

The Central government had on Tuesday announced a 21-day lockdown in a bid to stop the spread of the deadly virus that has left several thousand dead globally.

A total of 979 confirmed cases of COVID-19 have been reported in India, informed the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare on Sunday.

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.