D Raja should ask communists to shoot and kill his daughter: BJP leader

February 22, 2016

Coimbatore, Feb 22: BJP national secretary H Raja was at the centre of a controversy with remarks that CPI leader D Raja should ask communists to shoot and kill his daughter for taking part in "anti-national protests" in JNU.

raja"D Raja should demand that communists should shoot and kill his daughter for taking part in the JNU protest. To prove my love for this country, I would have done the same if my child was taking part in such anti-national protests," he told reporters in Coimbatore on Saturday.

When contacted, D Raja on Sunday declined to comment on the BJP leader's remarks.

The BJP office bearer said if communists love this country, how did they take part in an "anti-national" event.

He went on to say that "all those who attended the events in JNU are anti-nationals, whether it is Rahul (Gandhi) or (D) Raja or (Sitaram) Yechury ."

Comments

A. Mangalore
 - 
Tuesday, 23 Feb 2016

More such a talks are more benefit for Congress. Nai Bogalidare Deva loka haalaaguwude????

Let them bark whatever they feel. Let us fight for the freedom from RSS - Jai JNU

Fair talker
 - 
Tuesday, 23 Feb 2016

These BJP leaders and their followers are crazy.
Those students are not anti nationals. they are protesting for their rights. They are joined by the staff of the JNU.
Most of the students & staff are Hindus. If you are a flag carriers of Patriotism, how your own children can do this.

They are fighting against govt policy.
Why should the parents kill their children. If you want to kill, die yourself, that is also you don't have right to kill yourself. Because your life is the property of your God and it is given by your God.

Mani
 - 
Monday, 22 Feb 2016

Are people Mad ,,,,,even after ZEE tv producer quit and agreed that the slogans were fake .....but its also fact that the damage to JNU almost successful ..........

anyways Fascism is already in Thrid stage....either we have to cut the main part of take proper therapy for Fascist Media

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
April 12,2020

Bengaluru, Apr 12: As many as 17 new cases of coronavirus were confirmed on Sunday in Karnataka, taking the total number of infected to 232, the health department said.

This includes six deaths and 54 discharges.

According to the bulletin issued by the health department, six cases were reported from Vijayapura, four cases in Belagavi, three each in Bengaluru city and Kalaburagi and one in Mysuru.

Among the 17, four people are suffering from Severe Acute Respiratory Illness (SARI) -- two of whom are in Bengaluru and one each in Vijayapura and Kalaburagi, the department said.

Following the sudden spurt in cases in Vijayapura, the department has initiated contact tracing.

Ever since the outbreak of COVID-19, Bengaluru continued to top the list with 76 cases, followed by Mysuru with 48 cases, Belagavi with 14 cases, Kalaburagi with 13 cases and Dakshina Kannada with 12 cases.

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.
Agencies
February 12,2020

Bengaluru, Feb 12: Karnataka Sanghatanegala Okkoota, a congregation of various pro-Kannada organisations, has called for a state-wide bandh in Karnataka on Thursday (13 February 2020) demanding reservation in jobs for Kannadigas in both government and private sectors.

The Karnataka bandh, which will begin from 6 am to 6 pm, is likely to impact life in Bengaluru as well as in other parts of the state. Interestingly, Ola and Uber drivers have also extended support to the bandh. 

In Bengaluru, some other drivers’ associations, including Jai Bharatha Vehicle Owners and Drivers Association and Adarsha Auto and Taxi Union have also supported the bandh.

It is not yet clear as to whether the Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation (KSRTC) staff and workers associations will back Thursday’s bandh.

Several other organisations like the Karnataka Film Chamber of Commerce (KFCC), Centre of Indian Trade Unions (CITU), and Lorry Owners Association have supported the February 13 bandh.

In view of the bandh call, schools, colleges and hospitals across Karnataka are likely to remain closed on Thursday.

The Sarojini Mahishi report, which in 1984 suggested that Kannadigas should be given some reservation in jobs in private companies, public sector undertakings and multinational companies, is yet to be implemented.

It is to be noted that Sarojini Mahishi, a four-time MP and Janatha party leader, was appointed by the Ramakrishna Hegde government to head the panel in 1983. The committee submitted an interim report in June 1984. However, a final report was tabled in December 1986 with 58 recommendations, of which the Karnataka government had accepted 45.

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.
coastaldigest.com news network
February 14,2020

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.

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.