Kasaragod district in lock-down mode; cases against 10 traders for opening shops despite warning
Kasaragod: Kasaragod district, which has reported eight positive cases of Covid-19, was on Saturday put under total lock-down, while cases were registered against 10 traders who opened their shops despite warning.
Kerala Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan had on Friday described as "worrisome" the situation in Kasaragod district where one of the affected persons had moved around "disregarding" the health department's directions and had met scores of people at public events, weddings and a football match.
Vijayan had said all government offices will remain closed for one week and the shops will open only from 11 am to 5 pm in the district, where two MLAs have gone into self- quarantine after coming into contact with one of the positive cases.
District Collector D Sajith Babu said instructions have been given to concerned police officials to register cases against those owners who opened their shops despite warning.
The district administration formed various teams led by the Collector himself and conducted inspections across Kasaragod.
"Those who were asked to remain in home quarantine must follow the directions of the health department. We have to implement such stern action to avoid further spread of the virus," Babu told the media.
He said more cases will be registered in case of more violations.
"We have already given instructions to register around 12 cases. The situation became worse after some persons failed to follow the health department's directions. We cannot allow the situation to get out of our control," the Collector said.
The district administration has also booked a person, under home quarantine, for roaming around and meeting people despite specific directions.
A senior official from the district said the case was registered after the neighbours complained that a person under home isolation, after returning from abroad, was roaming around and meeting people.
"We have booked that person for not following the directions," the official said.
In view of six new positive cases at Kasaragod, government offices in the district would remain closed for a week from Saturday, while all places of worship and clubs would be shut for two weeks, Vijayan had said.
"Places of worship would remain shut for two weeks and shops would remain open only from 11 am to 5 pm. We need to impose such restrictions in Kasaragod. Even two MLAs from the district are also under observation as they had come in contact with a positive case," Vijayan had said.
With the fresh 12 cases identified on Friday, the total number of infected persons has gone up to 37 in Kerala.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
Bhojshala complex registered as 'mosque' in old revenue records: Muslim side to MP HC
Indore (PTI): The disputed Bhojshala Temple-Kamal Maula Mosque complex has historically been registered as a 'mosque' in revenue records and available sources don't clearly mention any Saraswati temple established by then-king Raja Bhoj, the Muslim side has told the Madhya Pradesh High Court.
The Hindu community considers Bhojshala a temple dedicated to Goddess Saraswati, while the Muslim side calls the 11th-century monument Kamal Maula Mosque. The disputed complex located in Dhar district is protected by the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI).
During the hearing before the HC's Indore bench of Justices Vijay Kumar Shukla and Justice Alok Awasthi on Wednesday, Qazi Moinuddin questioned two PILs filed as intervenors in the Bhojshala case by an organisation named Hindu Front for Justice, one Kuldeep Tiwari and another individual.
Moinuddin claims to be a descendant of Sufi saint Maulana Kamaluddin Chishti and the 'Sajjadanashin' (spiritual head, guru, or successor of a Sufi shrine, khanqah, or religious site).
The PILs state that Bhojshala is actually a Saraswati temple and only Hindus should be granted the right to worship at the disputed complex.
Moinuddin's lawyer, Noor Ahmed Sheikh, claimed in the court that his client's ancestors, who are descendants of Maulana Kamaluddin Chishti, have historically held titles to the complex, and the site was also recorded as a "mosque" in government revenue records.
He contended that those associated with the management of the Kamal Maula Mosque, located within the complex, have been in "continuous and peaceful occupation" of the site for a long time.
Citing Muslim law, Sheikh argued that in the case of religious property, particularly a mosque or its related properties, officials such as the Sajjadanashin and Mutawalli (person entrusted with management, maintenance, and administration of a Waqf), and their descendants, not only have the right to intervene, but also have the right to manage and use such a structure.
Citing provisions of the Ancient Monuments Preservation Act 1904, the Muslim side's lawyer said the term "in-charge of the property" is used in this law, which makes it clear that the person or party who has been in charge of a property for a long time has rights over it.
During the hearing, Touseef Warsi, the lawyer representing the Maulana Kamaluddin Welfare Society of Dhar, claimed that Hindu parties in both PILs had made "misleading representations" regarding historical facts before the high court.
He further claimed that available historical sources do not clearly mention the existence of a Saraswati temple established by Raja Bhoj, the legendary king of the Parmar dynasty who ruled Dhar from 1010 to 1055.
The ASI, a central government agency, has adopted three different positions in the lawsuits filed regarding the Bhojshala dispute, changing its answers from time to time, and this situation raises serious questions about judicial scrutiny of the complex, Warsi submitted.
He raised objections regarding the ASI's process of scientific survey of the Bhojshala complex, carried out on the HC order in 2024, and the method of videography and requested the court to examine these objections.
The hearing in the Bhojshala case will continue on Thursday.
The HC has been regularly hearing four petitions and one writ appeal since April 6, contesting the religious nature of the monument.
