Belthangady: Mahesh Shetty Timarodi and Girish Mattannavar appeared before Belthangady Police Station for inquiry on Wednesday, in connection with the clash incident that was reported near a private hospital in Ujire.
According to police sources, case numbers 76/77/79/2025 registered at Belthangady Police Station had listed 16 accused, including Mahesh Shetty Timarodi, who were issued notices to appear for questioning on August 20 at 10 AM. The accused appeared before the station later in the evening at around 5 PM.
Along with Mahesh Shetty Timarodi and Girish Mattannavar, others who attended the inquiry included Jayanth T. Venkappa Kotian, Srinivas Gowda, Mohan Shetty, Tanush Shetty, Pramod Shetty, Ganesh Shetty, and Rajesh Bhat, among the total 16 individuals.
Three separate cases had earlier been filed against Mahesh Shetty Timarodi, one relating to an unlawful gathering in front of the hospital, another for assaulting a private news channel reporter, and a third concerning derogatory remarks made to the media. All the accused appeared before Inspector Subbapur Math of Belthangady Police Station for questioning.
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.
New Delhi (PTI): The Supreme Court on Thursday stayed a Madras High Court order which restrained the Tamil Nadu Waqf Board from exercising any functions while observing that its constitution was prima facie not in accordance with the provisions of law.
A bench of Chief Justice Surya Kant and justices Joymalya Bagchi and Vipul M Pancholi issued notice to the Tamil Nadu government and others seeking their responses on the petition filed by the waqf board challenging the high court's January 8 order.
The high court had passed the order on a plea which challenged the constitution of the waqf board on the grounds, including that one out of the two persons as mandated in clause (d) of Section 14 of the Unified Waqf Management, Empowerment, Efficiency and Development Act, 1995, has not been nominated.
The plea before the high court also claimed non-compliance of the mandate that two of the total members of the Bar appointed under sub-section (1) of Section 14, excluding ex-officio members, shall be non-Muslim.
Section 14 of the Act deals with composition of board.
Before the high court, the counsel appearing for the state contended that constitution of the board is almost complete as majority of members have already been nominated or appointed and as far as other members are concerned, steps are being taken to complete the same.
In its order, the high court noted the mandate of second proviso that two of the total members of the board appointed under sub-section (1), excluding ex-offico member, shall be non-Muslim has also been not fulfilled.
"The constitution of the board as exists today, prima facie is not in accordance with the provisions of law," the high court said.
"In view of the above, the board cannot be allowed to exercise any powers and functions under the act. The board is hereby restrained from exercising any powers and functions," it said.
