K'taka Police admits its officers in uniform interrogating Shaheen School students was against rules
Bidar: Karnataka Police on Friday admitted in the court that its officers erred while questioning school students in a case pertaining to a play staged in their school, by wearing the uniform and carrying arms during the questioning.
Nagesh DL, the current Superintendent of Police of Bidar district, filed an affidavit in the Karnataka High Court on Friday stating that the officers were uniformed with armed weapons while questioning students in February 2020 and this was against the rules.
The SP further informed the High Court that he has submitted a report to the Director-General and Inspector General of Police (DG-IGP) he has recommended disciplinary action against the investigating police officers in the case.
"I state that it is the responsibility of the investigating officer (the then Deputy Superintendent of Police Basaveshwara Hira) to ensure that strict compliance of sub-rule (5) of Rule 86 of the Juvenile Justice Model Rules 2016 and in view of the same and keeping in mind the order dated 16-08-2021 passed by the Honourable Court, I have sent a report dated 31-08-2021 to the Director-General and Inspector General of Police (DG-IGP) to take appropriate disciplinary action against the concerned persons," read the affidavit submitted in court.
The affidavit was filed two weeks after the Karnataka High Court pulled up the state police over its interrogation of school children.
The police had last year arrested the mother of a student and a teacher from Shaheen School and charged them under Sedition charges following a play staged in Shaheen School in Bidar.
Police officials led by Basaveshwara turned up at the school five times, including in uniform, to question the students who were in the play. The police asked questions about who scripted the play and chose the dialogues which were in it. In particular, the police officials repeatedly questioned Ayesha*, Nazbunissa's daughter and one of the students involved in the play, for the dialogues uttered in it. The seemingly innocuous play, performed in the Dakkani language, questioned the need for CAA and NRC. It had a line that was allegedly derogatory to the Prime Minister.
"The dialogue in my considered opinion does not go to bring into hatred or contempt or to excite disaffection towards the government," the district judge Managoli Premavathi had said while granting bail to the duo on February 14, 2020.
In August 2021, a Karnataka High Court bench of former Chief Justice Abhay Oka and Justice NS Sanjay Gowda heard a petition filed by Nayana Jyothi Jhawar and South India Cell for Human Rights Education and Monitoring. The bench stated that the police action was a serious violation of the Juvenile Justice Act. The court noted that the Special Juvenile Police Unit for Children sub-rule 5 stated that police officers shall wear plain clothes when interacting with children and for dealing with a girl child, women police personnel will be engaged.
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.
Karnataka Assembly passes bill on Palace Grounds amid opposition protest
Bengaluru, Mar 6 (PTI): The Karnataka Assembly on Thursday passed the Bangalore Palace (Utilisation and Regulation of Land) Bill, reaffirming state ownership over 472 acres and 16 guntas of land here, amid protests by the opposition BJP.
During the discussion, Karnataka Law and Parliamentary Affairs Minister H K Patil said the state government would have to provide Rs 200 crore worth of Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) for each acre of land, which means that for 15 acres, Rs 3,000 crore worth of TDR would be issued.
“If we accept it, then this 2-km stretch of road will become the costliest road in the world. If we accept it then how are we going to develop the city in later stages? How will you carry out development works?” asked Patil.
He also pointed out that this question was raised not only under the Congress government but also during the previous BJP regime.
However, the BJP-led cabinet has opposed the project.
ALSO READ: Budget session: Law Min. HK Patil introduces Microfinance bill in Karnataka assembly
“Suppose we agree to it then, what will be the valuation of the 472 acres? It will be lakhs and lakhs of crores of rupees. Can we accept?” Patil wondered.
The Minister said the government had previously exercised its executive powers to issue an ordinance, which was approved by the Governor. Now the government is bringing a bill with two amendments.
“In this bill, we have made provisions either to develop or drop the road development work,” Patil explained.
However, BJP state president B Y Vijayendra and BJP MLA Arvind Bellad opposed the move, alleging that the government was targetting Yaduveer Krishna Datta Chamaraja Wadiyar, the scion of the Mysuru royal family, and the BJP MP from Mysuru-Kodagu constituency out of political vendetta.
“We talk of 472 acres of Mysuru Maharaja but here there are many Maharajas who too own 400 acres, 500 acres and thousands of acres of land, which is known to everyone,” Bellad said.
He slammed the Congress government, saying political power should not be misused for personal vendetta.
“Why (the then Deputy Chief Minister) Siddaramaiah brought the law in 1996 pertaining to the Bangalore Palace? Why are you setting eyes on the Bangalore Palace?” he asked.
Vijayendra charged that Wadiyar won the election on BJP ticket so the state government realised that it should acquire it.
“This bill has been brought for political vengeance. We are not discussing whether Rs 3,000 crore is exorbitant or not but the moment Yaduveer became MP, the state government woke up. You should be ashamed. This house should not be used for political vendetta,” he said.
Intervening, Minister Priyank Kharge said Vijayendra should not have raised it because the intention behind building the road was noble.
According to him, the BJP too had the same plan when it was in power.
He sought to know whether thousands of crores of rupees be spent on a road which should have cost significantly less.
In response, BJP MLA B A Basavaraj (Byrathi) said issuing TDR will not be a burden on the state government and appealed to the ruling Congress to reconsider its stance.
Minister Ramalinga Reddy too explained that the Karnataka government acquired the entire land way back in 1996.
The Mysuru royal family went to the High Court, which gave ruling in favour of the state government. The royal family then approached the Supreme Court, where the case is still going on, the Minister pointed out.
“The final judgment is pending in the SC to decide whether the acquisition was right or wrong. If the SC says it’s the royal family’s property then let it be so. If the order is in the state government’s favour then we can take a decision. The bill is only about it,” Reddy explained.
Speaker U T Khader then called for a voice vote and the bill was passed by the Assembly amidst opposition BJP’s discontent.
