Yet another fake investment company case surfaces in city

Bengaluru, May 18: Indian food delivery startup Swiggy said on Monday it would lay off 1,100 employees, or nearly 14% of its workforce, to cut costs, as a weeks-long nationwide lockdown to curb the coronavirus outbreak hits demand for online food ordering.

The company, backed by South African internet giant Naspers, also said it will scale down adjacent businesses and has already shut several of its cloud kitchens - facilities that only cater to takeaway orders - temporarily or permanently.

“The core food delivery business has been severely impacted and will stay impacted over the short term, but is expected to start growing again after that,” said Sriharsha Majety, co-founder and chief executive at Bengaluru-based Swiggy.

Swiggy, one of India’s best known startups, is among many that are laying off employees and reshaping their business in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, which has forced 1.3 billion Indians indoors and crippled business.

India is currently under a two-month lockdown, and though several curbs are being eased, public places such as restaurants remain closed, hurting restaurants themselves as well as companies such as Swiggy and main rival Zomato.

Bengaluru, Jul 6: A video clip of a Bengaluru-based doctor urging the follow doctors to return to their duty at a time when medicos are desperately needed to fight against COVID-19 has busted the myth of ‘shortage of beds’ in the hospitals. 

In past few of weeks, dozens of people in Bengaluru have lost their lives after hospital denied them admission citing lack of beds. 

Dr Taha Mateen, Managing Director of HBS Hospital, in an emotional message, appealed to healthcare professionals, including doctors, to help handle the situation better. The video has gone viral on social media.

“I speak from the ICU of HBS Hospital. It’s been a virtual bloodbath. I came in the morning at like 7:30 in the morning and its 12’o’clock midnight right now. Patients are continuously calling me now ‘cause their fathers are breathless, their brothers are breathless and they cannot find a room in Bengaluru and at this time if you see there is one Mr Shiva and me. There is no other doctor willing to work in this hospital,” Dr Mateen says in the video.

Dr Mateen further said, "I have beds, I have oxygen beds, I have ventilators, I have all the equipment. I have another 30 beds like this but I don’t have doctors working here.” He said that there is an urgent need to mobilise healthcare staff.

Sources said the COVID-19 patients at the hospital are left with only five doctors and 12 nurses. Until recently, the HBS Hospital had 20 nurses and 44 doctors on its roll.

According to a report, the hospital is facing huge difficulties in treating patients admitted at Intensive Care Units (ICU). Eight patients with severe respiratory problems are admitted to the hospital and are waiting for their COVID-19 test results.

"We have sufficient beds at the hospital to treat coronavirus patients, but we don't have doctors. And we can't admit more patients as we are left with just five doctors, said Dr Taha Mateen.

"All doctors are on WhatsApp, I request all doctors to come out and perform their duties, Dr Mateen said in a video appeal on WhatsApp, Twitter and Instagram. 

According to Dr Mateen, a COVID-19 patient, who was admitted to COVID care centre at Haj  Bhavan, was abandoned on a road by an ambulance driver. Later, the patient was picked by NGO volunteers. 

"The patient was brought to HBS Hospital at 2 am. He had a very low blood oxygen level. We stabilised his condition. Later, we had to send him home as we don't have enough staff to take care of him. We also sent an oxygen cylinder to his home," a report quoted Dr Mateen as saying.

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.