Teenage girl drowns as boat capsizes in River Netravati

Bengaluru, Jan 12: Chief Justice of India, Sharad Arvind Bobde on Saturday hinted at the possibility of Artificial Intelligence being developed for the court system while making it clear that it will never replace human discretion.

Speaking at an event here, Bobde said, "We have a possibility of developing Artificial Intelligence for the court system. Only for the purpose of ensuring that the undue delay in justice is prevented."

"I must make it clear at the outset as there are times when even judges have asked this. AI is not going to replace human judges or human discretion", he added.

Sharing more details of his vision, he stated, "It is only the repetitive, mathematical and mechanical parts of the judgments for which help can be taken from the system...we are exploring the possibility of implementing it."

Bobde stressed on the requirement of developing AI for judiciary while outlining the number of pending cases in different courts.

"Some people are in jail for 10-15 years and we are not in position to deal with their appeals. The high court's and Supreme Court take so long and ultimately the courts feel that it is just to release them on bail", he said.

Bobde also endorsed employing every talent and skill to ensure delivery of justice in a reasonable time.

"We must employ every talent, every skill we possess to ensure that justice is received within reasonable time. Delay in justice can't be a reason for anybody to take law into their hands. But it's very important for us as courts to ensure there's no undue delay in justice", he said.

CJI Bobde also highlighted the need for pre-litigation mediation and said, "Pre-litigation mediation is the need of the hour especially in the backdrop of a significant pendency that the courts are tackling with. There are innumerable areas where pre-litigation mediation could solve the problem."

He also stressed that the position of a judge is very unique under the constitution and they have to deal with a variety of problems.

"The foundation of civilisation rests on the law. Judicial officers have to deal with a variety of problems...Judges without adequate knowledge, skills and experience may cause distortion, delay and miscarriage of justice", he said.

Earlier in the day, Chief Justice of India Bobde inaugurated the phase-1 of the new building of the Karnataka Judicial Academy on Crescent Road in Bengaluru.

The new building has three floors, besides, the ground floor and two basement floors.

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.

Udupi, May 23: Five more persons tested positive for coronavirus in the coastal district of Udupi today. 

They include three men aged 37, 55, 31 and two women aged 48 and 34. 

Among them four are returnees from Mumbai and one is foreign returnee.

With this the total number of covid-19 cases in the district rose to 55.