Mangaluru cops bust ₹11.45 lakh online scam; 2 held for high-value electronics fraud

Mangaluru: On a scorching summer Friday, April 18, the usually quiet locality of Adyar Kannur in Mangaluru transformed into a powerful symbol of resistance and unity. A massive public protest, led by the Karnataka State Ulema Coordination Committee, witnessed an overwhelming turnout of nearly 3,000 people voicing their dissent against the Central Government’s recent amendments to the Waqf Act. 

The protest wasn’t just an outcry—it was a declaration of solidarity, discipline, and deep-rooted concern over the perceived infringement of religious and institutional autonomy.

Organized under the leadership and guidance of the Khazis from Dakshina Kannada and Udupi, the protest drew people from all corners of the region including Udupi, Dakshina Kannada, Chikkamagaluru, and Kodagu districts. The protest venue, Sha Garden in Adyar Kannur, turned into a sea of people as participants gathered from various towns and villages despite the scorching afternoon sun.

From 2 PM onwards, people began arriving in large numbers. The influx of participants led to significant traffic congestion on the adjoining highways, compelling authorities to reroute vehicles to maintain order. Inside the city and surrounding areas, many shops remained closed, partly due to the event and partly as it coincided with the sacred Jumma prayers.

Security was handled with tight coordination—police personnel were stationed at all major junctions, crossings, and strategic points. Alongside them, volunteer marshals maintained decorum at the protest site, managing the crowd efficiently and ensuring cleanliness by removing empty water bottles and litter.

Chants of “Azaadi” (freedom) echoed through the grounds as protesters raised their voices in peaceful opposition to the Waqf Amendment Bill. Despite the emotionally charged atmosphere, the protest remained peaceful. The organizers consistently appealed to the crowd via loudspeakers to maintain harmony and avoid any provocative slogans.

Drone surveillance and videographers were deployed for complete documentation of the event, enhancing both the security and transparency of the protest. However, the sheer number of participants caused temporary network disruptions, affecting mobile communication in the area.

Adding a patriotic touch, several protestors were seen waving the Indian national flag, reinforcing that the movement was deeply rooted in constitutional values and democratic expression.

Among the dignitaries present were UK Abdul Azeez Darami Chokkabettu, Dr. M S M Zaini Kamil, Abdul Khader Darami Kukkila, Kasim Darami Kinya, Aboobakkar Siddique Montugoli, Mehboob Sakafi Kinya, and Ashraf Kinara. Their presence underlined the seriousness of the gathering and provided moral and spiritual guidance to the demonstrators.

The peaceful protest stood as a clear, disciplined, and democratic expression of the Muslim community’s concern, sending a strong message to the authorities: religious rights and institutional independence are not to be tampered with.

Mangaluru, Apr 7: The long-standing demand for a separate Beary Development Corporation has hit a wall — the Karnataka government has officially stated that no such proposal is currently under consideration.

Beary-speaking people, mainly settled across Dakshina Kannada, Udupi, and parts of Kodagu, have been urging the government to set up a dedicated body for the welfare of their community and the promotion of their unique 1,200-year-old language. But during the recent legislative session, Minority Affairs Minister B.Z. Zameer Ahmed Khan confirmed that his department has not received any proposal on this matter.

The clarification came in response to a question by MLC Ivan D’Souza, who highlighted the community’s cultural richness and a population of over 25 lakh. “The community has raised this demand several times to support education and social upliftment, but the government hasn’t taken any concrete steps,” he said.

In his reply, the minister pointed out that the Karnataka Minorities Development Corporation (KMDC) already runs various welfare schemes for Muslim, Christian, Jain, Buddhist, Sikh, and Parsi communities. Since Beary speakers are considered part of the Muslim community, they are eligible for benefits under these existing programs, he added.

Still, many in the Beary community feel that without a separate development body, their identity, language, and specific needs risk being overlooked.

In a controversial statement that has sparked alarm among legal experts and constitutional scholars, Vice-President Jagdeep Dhankhar criticized the judiciary for allegedly overstepping its bounds, particularly targeting the Supreme Court’s recent verdict that set deadlines for the President and Governors to act on Bills.

“We cannot have a situation where courts direct the President,” Mr. Dhankhar said, suggesting that the judiciary is interfering with the powers of the executive. He further described Article 142 of the Constitution — which empowers the Supreme Court to pass orders necessary to do "complete justice" — as a “nuclear missile against democratic forces, available to the judiciary 24x7.”

This incendiary metaphor has drawn backlash for implying that judicial independence — a cornerstone of democracy — is somehow hostile or dangerous. Critics argue that such rhetoric undermines public trust in the judiciary and risks damaging the careful separation of powers between branches of government.

While addressing the sixth batch of Rajya Sabha interns, the Vice President also referred to a serious incident involving a Delhi High Court judge, Yashwant Varma, from whose residence a large amount of cash was allegedly recovered in March. He questioned the delayed disclosure of the incident and criticized the absence of an FIR against the judge.

“An FIR in this country can be registered against anyone, any constitutional functionary, including the one before you... But if it is Judges, FIR cannot be straightaway registered. It has to be approved by the concerned in the Judiciary, but that is not given in the Constitution,” he argued.

He went on to question why judges, unlike the President and Governors, appear to enjoy immunity not explicitly provided in the Constitution.

“If the event had taken place at his house, the speed would have been an electronic rocket. Now it is not even a cattle cart,” he remarked, criticizing the pace of response and investigation.

Why These Remarks Are Dangerous

While scrutiny of public institutions is necessary in a democracy, the Vice President’s remarks are concerning for several reasons:

1.    Undermining Judicial Authority: By calling Article 142 a "nuclear missile," the Vice President risks portraying the judiciary as a threat rather than a guardian of constitutional rights.

2.    Challenging Separation of Powers: The suggestion that courts should not “direct” the President could erode judicial checks on executive inaction or overreach, especially when constitutional responsibilities are being delayed or ignored.

3.    Eroding Public Confidence: As the Vice President of India — also the Chairperson of the Rajya Sabha — such statements carry institutional weight. Attacks on judicial legitimacy can embolden other political actors to disregard court rulings, weakening the rule of law.

4.    Threatening Judicial Independence: Implying that judges should be more easily prosecuted, without proper due process and internal accountability, could be seen as an attempt to intimidate the judiciary.

5.    Fueling Distrust During Sensitive Times: At a moment when public trust in institutions is essential, these remarks may sow unnecessary suspicion and politicize judicial matters that require careful and independent handling.

The Vice President’s speech has ignited a vital conversation about accountability and judicial conduct. However, framing the judiciary as a rogue institution and questioning its constitutional powers without nuance is fraught with danger. Safeguarding democracy requires mutual respect and balance among all pillars of governance — executive, legislature, and judiciary. When this balance is disturbed through political rhetoric, it threatens not just institutions, but the very foundation of constitutional democracy.