Kundapur: Man arrested for posting offensive comment on Vartha Bharati Facebook page
Kundapur: The Kundapur police have arrested a man from Bengaluru for allegedly posting an indecent and abusive comment on the Vartha Bharati Facebook page.
The accused has been identified as Prakash S (45), a resident of Mathikere, Bengaluru.
According to the police, on March 4, 2025, around 4.30 pm, an offensive comment was posted on a Facebook story titled “Today’s Hero of the Ramadan Story: Muhammad of Mangalore”. The post was related to an interview with Muhammad, who runs a vegetable business at the Central Market in Mangaluru.
Based on the incident, a suo motu case was registered at the Kundapur Police Station under Section 353(2) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Section 66(C) of the Information Technology Act, under Crime No. 31/2025.
The investigation was carried out under the guidance of Kundapur Sub-Division Deputy Superintendent of Police H.D. Kulkarni and led by Police Station Inspector Jayaram D. Gowda.
The operation team included PSI Nanjanaik N. (Law and Order), PSI Smt. Pushpa (Investigation), and staff members Santhosh, Mohan, Santhosh Devadiga, Ghanshyama, Annappa, Mahabala Shettigara, Nagashri and Gautama.
Police said the accused was arrested and produced before the court.
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.
Supreme Court declines plea against pujas at Ladle Mashaq Dargah in Kalaburagi
New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Thursday declined to entertain a writ petition seeking to restrain courts from permitting Hindu pujas at the Raghav Chaitanya (Shivalinga) located within the Hazrath Ladle Mashaq Dargah premises in Aland town of Kalaburagi district. The petition was dismissed as withdrawn.
According to The Hindu, a Bench of Justices Dipankar Datta and S.C. Sharma was hearing the plea filed by Khaleel Ansari, secretary of the managing committee of Dargah Hazrath Malikul Mashaikh Makdoom Ladle Ansari.
The petitioner submitted that the property had already been declared Waqf property by the Waqf Tribunal. Despite this, third parties were allegedly filing writ petitions and applications before the Karnataka High Court seeking permission to conduct pujas on specific occasions. The High Court had passed ad hoc orders permitting rituals from time to time, including for the upcoming Maha Shivratri on February 15.
The plea contended that such permissions would alter the religious character of the property in violation of the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991. It sought directions to protect the Waqf status of the dargah and to restrain courts from passing interim orders permitting entry, puja, inspection, survey, construction, installation or alteration of the religious character of the property while an appeal against the Waqf declaration is pending.
The petitioner also relied on the Supreme Court’s December 2024 order which said that courts should not accept new cases challenging the religious character of places of worship.
Senior advocate Vibha Datta Makhija, appearing for the petitioner, contended that once the Waqf Tribunal had declared the property as Waqf, the issue should not be reopened through repeated petitions.
She submitted that since 2023, third parties had been approaching the High Court every year ahead of Maha Shivratri seeking permission to perform rituals, and temporary orders were being granted.
She argued that this affected the managing committee’s rights under Article 26 of the Constitution and sought tagging of the matter with other pending cases related to the Places of Worship Act.
The Bench, however, was not inclined to entertain the plea under Article 32. Justice Datta observed that Article 32 was not designed to be invoked merely because certain orders had been passed by a High Court. “Unless it is a pan-India issue,” he remarked, the remedy would not lie under Article 32. He indicated that if the High Court were to dismiss a petition, the aggrieved party could pursue appropriate remedies thereafter.
The Court also observed that matters relating to the declaration of Waqf property fall within the jurisdiction of the Waqf Tribunal. The request to tag the matter with the Places of Worship Act cases was declined.
The petition was ultimately dismissed as withdrawn.
