Protesters demand suspension of policemen for assault on children

January 25, 2012

Mangalore, January 25: Condemning the recent police atrocity on school children and a Gram Panchayat president by Bajpe police, the Bajpe Muslim Okkuta and other progressive organisations on Monday staged a protest in front of the office of Deputy Commissioner, here.

Addressing the protestors, District Congress Committee President Ramanath Rai said that the police act of resorting to lathi charge on school children and Bajpe Gram Panchayat President Shahul Hameed for staging a protest against the PWD's action to remove the humps in front of Ansar English Medium School, is condemnable.

“Police resorted to lathi-charge at an elected representative when he tried to solve the problems within his limits. The incident was an attempt to disrupt peace and communal harmony in the region. It was an attempt to divide the society for getting political mileage,” he said.

MLA Abhayachandra Jain urged the State government to suspend Bajpe Police Inspector for his alleged action against the school kids and public.

“The lathi-charge at Bajpe was politically motivated,” said Jain.

KPCC General Secretary Ivan D'Souza said that the assault on protestors for protesting against the government is on rise in the recent years in Dakshina Kannada district.

“Those who protest against the government are suppressed using the police force in the State. It is a shame that we have a government which supports the communal forces in the district. Speed breaker was necessary as a school and a masjid was situated in the said vicinity. The assault on Gram Panchayat President was an insult to the elected representative,” said D'Souza demanding suspension of the Police Inspector.

The protestors who had gathered in large numbers shouted slogans against the Bajpe police station inspector and urged the authorities to initiate action against him. Members from PFI, DYFI and others were present.

In a memorandum submitted to the Deputy Commissioner, the protestors said that the police should have protected the interest of the public by installing speed breakers. Instead of protecting the interest of the people, the police acted like dictators.

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