Yet another daylight murder rocks Mangaluru

Mangaluru, Jan 5: In a frightening incident, a leopard which was trapped in a snare attacked and injured three persons in its successful bid to escape Balpa village in Sullia taluk of Dakshina Kannada. 

The incident occurred on Thursday when around 15 forest staff approached the trapped leopard to tranquilize it with a dart. The leopard, however, managed escape. 

While running away, it attacked a villager Balakrishna, aged about 70, who was working in the nearby plantation. He sustained injuries on his upper lips.

He was rushed to a hospital in Sullia and then was shifted to the Government Wenlock hospital for further treatment. He is learnt to be out of danger.

After this incident, the forest department kept a tab and tracked the leopard using a drone.  

According to V Karikalan, deputy conservator of forest (DCF), Dakshina Kannada, Between 5pm to 5.30pm on a tip off that leopard was spotted near a bush, the forest department tried to approach it again and the animal jumped on the officials, injuring Assistant Conservator of Forests Austin and forest guard Divith. 

The injured were rushed to a nearby hospital and then taken to Mangaluru for further treatment. They are learnt to be out of danger.

Meanwhile, the department is continuing combing in the village and surrounding areas. Three teams consisting of three RFOs and 10 Dy RFOs, supported by doctors are on the field. The forest department has also placed two leopard capturing cages in the area. Night patrolling will continue and public announcements are being made.

Mangaluru, May 6: Amidst preparation for the paid evacuation of Indians stuck in Gulf countries amidst coronavirus lockdown, the central government has announced that it would only do a medical screening of the passengers before the flight and only asymptomatic persons would be allowed to travel.

Each passenger will have to fill a self-reporting form to be presented at the health and immigration counter at their destination.

The passengers are required to state whether they are suffering from fever, cough, diabetes or any respiratory disease. This form is similar to the one filled by passengers landing in India during the early days of the COVID-19 outbreak.

As per the announcement by the government, returnees would undergo COVID-19 once they complete 14-day quarantine in a hospital or government –arranged institution on a payment basis.

However, the form asks the applicants to keep themselves isolated at home for 28 days unless they develop any symptoms such as fever and cough.

During the journey, they will have to follow the protocols such as those issued by the Health Ministry and the Civil Aviation Ministry. Applicants from the UAE are yet to receive instructions on these.

On reaching the destination, passengers will have to register on the Arogya Setu app, India’s mobile application for COVID-19 surveillance.

No physical distancing!

Air India Express (AIE) which is set to operate the first two flights to Kerala on Thursday will operate its Boeing 737-800 flights, with a seating capacity of 186 economy class seats.

With nine seats reserved for isolation, only 177 passengers would be flown, sources said.

While most of the UAE flights in the first week will be operated by the AIE, Air India will operate two of its Dreamliner aircraft with a seating capacity of 256 seats. These flights would also reserve some seats for isolation.

However, the plan has made it clear that the Indian government will not be following the rules of physical distancing to prevent the spread of coronavirus in the repatriation flights.

Several people, including the Chief Minister of Kerala Pinarayi Vijayan, expressed concern over flying passengers, who will not be tested for COVID-19, without observing physical distancing.

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.