Poojary demands Tanvir Sait's resignation; UTK says party will decide

Bengaluru, May 26: The Karnataka high court has rejected bail to a software engineer who was arrested after his sarcastic Facebook post urged people to spread coronavirus by sneezing in public over two months ago.

Mujeeb Mohammed was sacked by Infosys from the post of senior software engineer after his arrest on March 29.

Justice KS Mudagal observed the investigating officer's report and the case diary prima facie show though Mujeeb was well educated and employed, he uploaded messages which are likely to cause disharmony and panic, and are hostile to humanity at a time when the world is facing the pandemic.

The judge noted that the records indicate Mujeeb has six bank accounts, stayed in Bahrain and Kuwait for some years, was influenced by religious fanatics and anti-national ideas and that he had shared a Pakistan WhatsApp number to someone over information about Islam. The National Investigation Agency is probing his links.

Mujeeb, who is in judicial custody now, has been booked under sections 153A, 505, 270 and 109 of IPC.

His counsel submitted the maximum punishment under 153 A of IPC (causing enmity) would be three years and for other offences, it's even less. He also stated the petitioner would abide by the conditions to be imposed by the court.

However, the government pleader said probe provided leads on the petitioner's links with unorganised terrorist groups and it has to be investigated further.

Bengaluru, Feb 14: A 31 -year-old Bhojpuri dancer and another girl were rescued from human traffickers after the former alerted city police on landing at Kempegowda International Airport (KIA) on Tuesday. They were to be received by a woman named Preethi at the airport.

The dancer had been told she was supposed to perform a few stage shows in the city, which has a significant Bhojpuri-speaking population. But when she realised she is likely to be pushed into flesh trade, she raised an alarm.

The woman, Radha (name changed), is a mother of four children and the lone breadwinner of the family. A few months ago, Radha came in contact with a woman named Soniya in New Delhi during a dance performance. Last month, Soniya got in touch with Radha and offered to pay Rs 40,000 per month if she performed in Bengaluru.

Radha agreed and was sent to Bengaluru from Chandigarh along with the other girl. During the journey, she learnt she was supposed to do more than just perform on stage. A shocked Radha informed the Central Industrial Security Force personnel manning KIA that she feared being pushed into prostitution. KIA police were informed and the women were rescued. Preethi was arrested.

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.