When top judges say democracy is at stake, media focus on Sunny Leone

New Delhi, Jan 17: Airports in Srinagar and Jammu are to be “immediately” brought under the security cover of the CISF in view of the arrest of DSP Davinder Singh, a Jammu and Kashmir government order has said.

The two sensitive airports are to be “handed over” to the CISF by January 31, the order of the Jammu and Kashmir Home Department to the Director General of Police (DGP) said.

“This issue (CISF security at Srinagar and Jammu airports) has acquired immediacy in view of the recent developments relating to the arrest of Davinder Singh, DSP airport security, for trying to assist militants to travel to other parts of the country,” the order issued on Wednesday said.

Police had arrested Singh, a deputy superintendent of police, at Mir Bazar in Jammu and Kashmir’s Kulgam district on Saturday, along with Hizbul Mujahideen terrorists Naveed Baba and Altaf, besides a lawyer who was operating as an overground worker for terror outfits.

The two airports are guarded by the CRPF and the J-K Police at present.

The Union government had last year decided that the Central Industrial Security Force (CISF) will be handed over security of these two airports along with the one in Leh in view of their sensitive and strategic location and the threats it faced related to possible terrorist and hijack attempts.

CISF is the national civil aviation security force and at present it guards 61 airports including the ones at Delhi and Mumbai.

News agency had on January 13 reported that the Union home ministry sanctioned about 800 personnel to the CISF in order to take over security duties at the three airports of the newly created Union Territories of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh.

As per the original plan, the CISF was to take over Jammu airport by next month and the Srinagar and Leh airports after the spell of severe cold ends.

However, officials said, keeping in mind the arrest of the DSP and his alleged links, the latest order has been issued which also directs the J-K Police to make arrangements for accommodation, transport and other logistical requirements of the armed contingent of the CISF on a quick basis.

Once inducted at the most-sensitive Srinagar airport, the CISF will secure access control at both city and air side (tarmac area) while the CRPF will be responsible for securing the outer periphery. At the Jammu airport, the peripheral security duties will be rendered by the JK Police.

An assortment of surveillance and security gadgets like CCTVs, observation monitors, hand-held metal detectors, bullet-proof patrol vehicles and bomb detection and disposal equipment are also being provided by the airport operator, the Airports Authority of India (AAI), to the CISF.

The Union government sometime back made it clear that CISF will be the only civil airports guarding force and all such facilities in the country will be gradually brought under its command to bolster aviation security and tighten anti-terror and anti-hijack protocols.

Bengaluru, Feb 15: The new Karnataka Minister for Forest Anand Singh on Friday said that he is ready for 'change in the portfolio' as opposition parties are leveling charges against Chief Minister B S Yediyurappa for appointing him, despite having 15 cases registered under Forest Act against him.

"If Chief Minister wants to change my portfolio, I am ready," he added.

Speaking to newsmen here, he said that there are 15 cases pending against him. The Legislator from Vijayanagara in Mine rich Ballari district said anyone can go through the Chargesheets and find out whether there are any direct charges against him. Claiming that the cases against him were 'minor violations', he had earlier linked them to traffic violations by a vehicle owner.

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.