Experts panel submits report on online classes to Katakana govt

News Network

July 8, 2020

Bengaluru, Jul 8: The expert committee constituted by the Karnataka government to look into imparting online education in the wake of the COVID-19 lockdown submitted its report on Tuesday to the Minister for Primary and Secondary Education, S Suresh Kumar.

Amid growing pressure by educational institutions to allow them to run online classes for the students, the government set up the committee headed by noted educationist M K Sridhar.

The Minister told reporters that some schools wanted to run online classes, including for LKG and UKG students. It had also come to the government's notice that schools were reportedly charging hefty fees in the name of online teaching, he added.

"To address the concerns of parents, schools, and the future of the children, the committee was formed,"Kumar said. He further said that the government would study the recommendations and hold discussions with officials and various stakeholders before arriving at a decision.

The Education Department said that the committee, in its report, titled "Continuation of Learning in School Education of Karnataka: Guidelines During COVID-19 Pandemic for Technology Enabled Education and Beyond", has recommended teaching online or by using printed material. The committee suggested that children in the age group of three to six be taught online by way of story-telling, rhymes and games strictly in the presence of parents thrice a week just for one session a day For students from class one to three, it advised two periods a day and three days a week for online teaching.

Students from class three to five would have classes five days a week and two classes for 30 minutes a day. For students from class six to eight, there could be three classes a day for a duration of 30 minutes to 45 minutes each, while for students of class nine and 10 there would be four sessions a day between 30 and 45 minutes each.

The committee also suggested usage of Doordarshan and Akashwani for the government school children. Suresh Kumar said there were a few petitions filed in the Karnataka High Court regarding online teaching to the children.

Comments

Add new comment

Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.

HC refuses to quash probe against Mangaluru WhatsApp admin over offensive posts

News Network

February 1,2026

Bengaluru: The Karnataka High Court has refused to quash an investigation against a WhatsApp group administrator accused of allowing the circulation of obscene and offensive images depicting Hindutva politicians and idols in 2021.

Justice M Nagaprasanna observed that, prima facie, the ingredients of the offence under Section 295A of the Indian Penal Code were made out. “The offence under Section 295A of the IPC is met to every word of its ingredient, albeit prima facie,” the judge said.

The petitioner, Sirajuddin, a resident of Belthangady taluk in Dakshina Kannada district, had challenged the FIR registered against him at the CEN (Cyber, Economics and Narcotics) police station, Mangaluru, for offences under Section 295A of the IPC and Section 67 of the Information Technology Act. Section 295A relates to punishment for deliberate and malicious acts intended to outrage the religious feelings of any class of citizens.

According to the complaint filed by K Jayaraj Salian, also a resident of Belthangady taluk, he received a WhatsApp group link from an unknown source and was added to the group after accessing it. The group reportedly had six administrators and around 250 participants, where obscene and offensive images depicting Hindu deities and certain political figures were allegedly circulated repeatedly.

Sirajuddin was arrested in connection with the case and later released on bail on February 16, 2021. He argued before the court that he was being selectively targeted, while other administrators—including the creator of the group—were neither arrested nor investigated. He also contended that the Magistrate could not have taken cognisance of the offence under Section 295A without prior sanction under Section 196(1) of the CrPC.

Rejecting the argument, Justice Nagaprasanna held that prior sanction is required only at the stage of taking cognisance, and not at the stage of registration of the crime or during investigation.

The judge noted that the State had produced the entire investigation material before the court. “A perusal of the material reveals depictions of Hindu deities in an extraordinarily obscene, demeaning and profane manner. The content is such that its reproduction in a judicial order would itself be inappropriate,” the court said, adding that the material, on its face, had the tendency to outrage religious feelings and disturb communal harmony.

Observing that the case was still at the investigation stage, the court said it could not interdict the probe at this juncture. However, it expressed concern that the investigating officer appeared to have not proceeded uniformly against all administrators. The court clarified that if the investigation revealed the active involvement of any member in permitting the circulation of such content, they must also be proceeded against.

“At this investigative stage, any further observation by this Court would be unnecessary,” the order concluded.

Comments