Mangaluru: City Top cop issues guidelines for new year celebrations
Mangaluru: Mangaluru Police Commissioner Anupam Aggarwal has issued guidelines in public interest for New Year Celebrations within the Mangaluru City Police commissionerate.
The guidelines are as follows:
-
"All hotels, restaurants, clubs, resorts and other establishments planning to organize New Year celebrations must obtain prior permission from the Mangaluru City Police Commissioner's Office. Applications must be submitted by 5 pm on December 23," the statement
-
The New Year program must be completed by 12 midnight. The program cannot be continued after that. New Year festivities without prior permission will not be allowed. Legal action will be taken against those who violate these rules. Organizers must strictly follow the rules as per the licenses and permissions obtained from the relevant departments.
-
If any COVID-19 or other health related government instructions are implemented, the organizers must strictly follow them.
-
Written permission from the Excise Department must be obtained for the sale and distribution of alcohol.
-
Smoking and drinking alcohol are strictly prohibited in public places, bus stands, parks, stadiums, railway stations and other public areas.
-
Legal action will be take cause disturbance in public places.
-
Prior permission should be obtained for using sound recording systems, loud speakers. The sound level should comply with the Noise Pollution Rules 2000 and the directions of the Supreme Court. DJ is strictly prohibited.
-
The organizers should take additional measures to prevent any mishap. Individual parking arrangements should be made.
-
The managers of hotels, clubs or special events where New Year celebrations are held should not serve alcohol to individuals below the age of 18. Minors should not be allowed to enter such events unless accompanied by their parents.
-
Obscene dances, semi-nude performances, gambling and other obscene activities are strictly prohibited.
-
Special task forces will be deployed to prevent harassment, violence or obscene activities against women in the name of festivals.
-
Disturbing caused to residences, hotels, hostels or compounds is also prohibited during this time.
-
Smoking, drinking, or indecent behavior in public spaces such as parks, bus stands, and railway stations is banned. Strict action will be taken against those disturbing public peace, engaging in harassment, or performing obscene acts.
-
A rapid task force comprising traffic police and experts has been formed to keep a watch on those who drive after drinking alcohol. This task force will be operational in all areas of Mangaluru city. Appropriate legal action will be taken against those who drive in an inebriated state.
-
Spontaneous activities, wheeling, drag racing, speeding and loud noise-producing activities are strictly prohibited. Special teams will be deployed to prevent these incidents.
-
Consumption of alcohol, obscene acts, other obscene displays in other public places or on the seashore are strictly prohibited.
-
Burning of fireworks in a manner that disturbs the peace of the public on the pretext of New Year celebrations is prohibited.
-
Organizers should coordinate necessary fire-fighting equipment, emergency medical vehicles and other security measures.
All these guidelines have been issued in the interest of public safety and law and order, the Commissioner said in a statement.
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.
Deep societal faultlines persist despite 75 years of independence: Justice Ujjal Bhuyan
Judge cites denial of home to Muslim girl, opposition to Dalit women cooking mid-day meals
Hyderabad, February 23, 2026: Supreme Court judge Justice Ujjal Bhuyan has said that despite repeated affirmations of constitutional morality by courts, deep societal faultlines rooted in caste and religious discrimination continue to shape everyday realities in India.
Speaking at a seminar on “Constitutional Morality and the Role of District Judiciary” organised by the Telangana Judges Association and the Telangana State Judicial Academy in Hyderabad, Justice Bhuyan reflected on the gap between constitutional ideals and social practices.
He cited a recent instance involving his daughter’s friend, a PhD scholar at a private university in Noida, who was denied accommodation in South Delhi after her surname revealed her Muslim identity. According to Justice Bhuyan, the landlady bluntly informed her that no accommodation was available once her religious background became known.
In another example from Odisha, he referred to resistance by some parents to the government’s mid-day meal programme because the food was prepared by Dalit women employed as cooks. He noted that some parents had objected aggressively and refused to allow their children to consume meals cooked by members of the Scheduled Caste community.
Describing these incidents as “the tip of the iceberg,” Justice Bhuyan said they reveal how far society remains from the benchmark of constitutional morality even 75 years into the Republic. He observed that while the Constitution lays down standards of equality and dignity, the morality practised within homes and communities often diverges sharply from those values.
He emphasised that constitutional morality requires governance through the rule of law rather than the rule of popular opinion. Referring to the evolution of the doctrine through judicial decisions, he cited Naz Foundation v Union of India, in which the Delhi High Court read down Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code, holding that popular morality cannot restrict fundamental rights under Article 21. Though the judgment was later overturned in Suresh Kumar Koushal v Naz Foundation, the Supreme Court ultimately restored and expanded the principle in Navtej Singh Johar v Union of India, affirming that constitutional morality must prevail over majoritarian views.
“In our constitutional scheme, it is the constitutionality of the issue before the court that is relevant, not the dominant or popular view,” he said.
Justice Bhuyan also addressed the functioning of the district judiciary, underlining that trial courts are the first point of contact for most litigants and form the foundation of the justice delivery system. He stressed that due importance must be given to the recording of evidence and adjudication of bail matters.
Highlighting the role of High Courts, he said their supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution is intended as a shield to correct grave jurisdictional errors, not as a mechanism to substitute the discretion or factual appreciation of trial judges.
He recalled that several distinguished judges, including Justice H R Khanna, Justice A M Ahmadi, and Justice Fathima Beevi, began their careers in the district judiciary.
On representation within the judicial system, Justice Bhuyan noted that Telangana has made significant strides in gender inclusion. Out of a sanctioned strength of 655 judicial officers in the Telangana Judicial Service, 478 are currently serving, of whom 283 are women, exceeding 50 per cent representation. He added that members of Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, minority communities, and persons with disabilities are also represented in the state’s judiciary.
He observed that greater representation of women, marginalised communities, persons with disabilities, and sexual minorities would help make the judiciary more inclusive and reflective of India’s diversity. “The judiciary must represent all the colours of the rainbow and become a rainbow institution,” he said.
Justice Bhuyan also referred to the recent restoration by the Supreme Court of the requirement of a minimum three years of practice at the Bar for entry-level judicial posts. While acknowledging that the requirement ensures practical exposure, he cautioned that its impact on women aspirants, especially those from rural or small-town backgrounds facing social and financial constraints, would need to be carefully observed over time.
Concluding his address, he reiterated that the justice system must strive to bridge the gap between constitutional ideals and lived realities, ensuring that the rule of law remains paramount.
