Not keen to keep Dr Zakir Naik, says PM Mahathir as Malaysian Hindus demand his deportation

Ahmedabad, Feb 24: US President Donald Trump arrived in Ahmedabad on Monday for the first leg of his India trip.

The Air Force One plane carrying Trump and his wife Melania landed at the Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel international airport here at 11.37 am, officials said.

It was scheduled to land at 11.40 am.

Prime Minister Narendra Modi, who reached Ahmedabad over an hour before Trump did, was present at the airport to welcome the US president at the airport.

In Ahmedabad, Trump will visit Mahatma Gandhi's Sabarmati Ashram, take part in a roadshow with Modi and jointly address over one lakh people at a cricket stadium, before heading for Agra to see the iconic Taj Mahal with Melania.

Trump, who is also accompanied by daughter Ivanka, son-in-law Jared Kushner and top brass of his administration, will get a taste of India's cultural melange during his high- optics Gujarat itinerary, after the bonhomie between the two leaders at the 'Howdy, Modi!' event in Houston last year.

The US president and Modi will participate in a roadshow from the airport to Sabarmti Ashram and from there to the newly-built Motera cricket stadium, where over a lakh people are expected to be present for the 'Namaste Trump' event.

Dance groups and singers from different parts of the country will be performing on stages that are dotting the 22- km route of the 'India roadshow' in the city.

Huge billboards of the two leaders and replicas of historic places in Gujarat have also been placed along the roads where people will greet the two leaders.

Over 10,000 police personnel, besides officials of the United States Secret Service, and personnel of the National Security Guards (NSG) and the Special Protection Group (SPG) have been deployed for the high profile visit.

The seventh US president to visit India, Trump on Sunday retweeted a video in which his face was superimposed on the hit Indian movie-character Bahubali, showing him as a great saviour.

Modi will accompany Trump to the Sabarmati Ashram, which was home to Mahatma Gandhi from 1917-1930 during India's freedom struggle.

Several world leaders including Chinese President Xi Jinping and Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe have visited Sabarmati Ashram in recent years.

Ashram secretary Amrut Modi said Trump will spend 15 minutes at the place.

"Trump will visit the 'Hriday Kunj'. If he wishes, he will spin a charkha (spinning wheel). We will also gift him a coffee-table book, and a book containing 150 quotations of Gandhi," the Ashram official said.

Hriday Kunj is a room on the Ashram premises where Mahatma Gandhi and his wife Kasturba Gandhi had lived for 12 years between 1918 and 1930.

The official said the US President would be briefed about Gandhiji and the importance of charkha as a symbol of self-reliance.

There will be a cultural extravaganza at the Motera stadium during the 'Namaste Trump' event, where Trump and Modi will address the gathering.

Bollywood singer Kailash Kher and some Gujarati folk singers will perform at the stadium, officials of the Gujarat Cricket Association said.

Students of various government and private schools have also been roped in to perform at cultural events and they have been practicing for days, an official said.

Billboards with slogans hailing Indo-US relations and having pictures of Trump and Modi walking together, shaking hands, and waving at the crowd during the 'Howdy Modi' event are dotting the city.

Mangaluru, Jun 25: Teacher-turned-serial rapist-cum-killer Cyanide Mohan Kumar was sentenced to life imprisonment in the 20th and final case by Sixth Additional District and Sessions Judge Sayeedunnisa on Wednesday.

Cyanide Mohan Kumar (57) was declared guilty in the 20th rape and murder case on Saturday and the judge had pronounced the order before a small group of advocates in the court hall. Cyanide Mohan who appeared in the court hall via video conferencing facility from Hindalga central jail in Belagavi did not show any emotions.

The 25-year-old victim from Kasaragod was working as a cook in a hostel and met Mohan, serving as a teacher in 2009. He had met her at her home on many occasions and had promised to marry her.

On July 8, 2009, she left home on the pretext of visiting a temple in Sullia and

did not return. When her family tried to reach her on phone, Cyanide Mohan had told they were married and would return home soon.

Mohan took her to a toilet in a bus stand in Bengaluru on July 15, 2009, and had left with her jewels after ascertaining that she had died by consuming Cyanide. No sooner Mohan was arrested in October 2009, the family of the victim had recognised him from the newspapers. The police also recovered the victim’s jewellery from the house of Mohan’s second wife.

Sixth Additional District and Session Court convicted Mohan under sections of IPC 302 for murder with life sentence and Rs 25,000 fine, IPC 366 for kidnapping with ten years of rigorous imprisonment and Rs 5000 fine, IPC 376 for rape with seven years of rigorous imprisonment and Rs 5000 fine, IPC 328 for poisoning with ten years of imprisonment, IPC 394 for causing hurt while robbing with 10 years of imprisonment and Rs 5000 fine, IPC 392 for theft with five years of imprisonment, IPC 201 for destroying evidence with seven years of rigorous imprisonment and Rs 5000 fine, IPC 417 cheating and one year of imprisonment.

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.