Veteran actor R.N. Sudarshan no more

Bengaluru, May 17: Karnataka on Sunday extended lockdown for two days until midnight of Tuesday, May 19. Earlier today, Tamil Nadu and Maharashtra extended the lockdown till May 31. The state government said that the guidelines and norms as followed during Coronavirus Lockdown 3 will remain in place till 19th midnight or till further notice.

Meanwhile, the total number of coronavirus cases in Karnataka rose to 1,146 on Saturday. With 37 deaths and 497 discharges, there are 611 active corona cases in the state. 

Out of 54 new cases, twentytwo are from Mandya, ten from Kalaburagi, six from Hassan, four from Dharwad, three each from Yadgir and Kolar, two each from Dakshina Kannada and Shivamogga, and one each from Udupi and Vijayapura.

Udupi, Jan 30: Fishermen in Udupi’s Malpe have netted ‘spanner crab’, a rare variety of deep sea crab, mostly found in Australia and Hawaiian coast.

Hundreds of onlookers were surprised to the see the catch when it was brought to Malpe harbour by the fisherman Prashanth Kunder and others on Tuesday evening.

Dr Shivakumar Haragi, Assistant Professor at Karnatak University, PG Centre Department of Marine Biology, Karwar identified this crab variety as ‘spanner crab’ and the scientific name of this crab is Ranina Ranina.

Ranina Ranina is mainly nocturnal as it remains active during night and is found buried in sand during the day .It is easily distinguished from other crab species in its habitat due to its red carapace and elongated midsection.

Resembling a frog in its shape, this crab species is found mainly in Africa, Hawaiian coast and also in the Great Barrier Reef, located in the Coral Sea, off the coast of Queensland, Australia. Its lifetime is seven to nine years and each crab weighs around 400-900 grams.

Prashanth Kunder and his associates have also netted a rare fish variety called yellow-edged lyretail. Another unique variety fish netted by Prashanth is epinephelus flavocaeruleus.

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.