Hoax bomb threat to Bengaluru school was made by Class 10 student

NRI professionals hailing from the coastal and Malnad regions of Karnataka, now based in Singapore, Indonesia, Malaysia, Hong Kong, and Australia, have been urging the Indian government and airlines to introduce a direct flight between Mangalore International Airport (MIA) and Singapore’s Changi Airport.

These professionals argue that Singapore’s strategic location as a hub connecting India with East Asia makes this flight essential. They highlight that this route would serve over 12 million people from the coastal and hill regions of southern India, fostering stronger ties with East Asian economies.

The group, consisting of individuals from Dakshina Kannada, Uttara Kannada, Udupi, Chikkamagaluru, Kodagu, Shivamogga, and Hassan, is spearheaded by Rajesh H Acharya, director of HQ Connections Pte Ltd, Singapore, and coordinator of the Singapore Tuluver community. Acharya emphasized the significance of the Indian government’s Act East policy, which aims to strengthen relationships between India and ASEAN, East Asia, and the Asia-Pacific region.

“This flight will open new doors for cultural, trade, tourism, and technological exchanges between these regions,” Acharya said.

The Mangalore Chapter of IndUS Entrepreneurs (TiE) has also proposed positioning the region as the 'Silicon Beach of India.' A direct flight would provide greater opportunities for entrepreneurs and investors from both Singapore and Mangaluru, boosting business exchanges.

Moreover, Singapore’s Changi Airport could see increased tourism from the Karnataka coast, while Coastal Karnataka would benefit from a surge in visitors from ASEAN countries, the Far East, Australia, New Zealand, and the US West Coast.

While a similar attempt in 2017 did not succeed, Acharya and his team are hopeful that this time their appeal will be taken seriously, tapping into the immense growth potential of the eastern half of the globe.

The Karnataka High Court on Tuesday dismissed the petition filed by Chief Minister Siddaramaiah against Governor Thawarchand Gehlot's decision to sanction the complaint and investigation against him in the alleged Mysore Urban Development Authority (MUDA) scam case.

Justice M Nagaprasanna said the facts narrated in the petition would undoubtedly require an investigation.

The court has also said that the Governor's order approving sanction to investigate against Siddaramaiah under section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act does not suffer from application of mind, instead has abundance of application of mind.

Meanwhile, the court rejected the request made by senior advocate Abhishek Singhvi to stay the order of the court. The court has vacated the interim order passed on August 19. In the interim order the trial court was directed not to take any precipitative action against Siddaramaiah. On August 17, Governor had approved sanction under section 17 A  of the Prevention of Corruption Act and Section 218 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita ( BNSS), citing three applications.

The court said the private complainants were justified in registering the complaint and seeking approval from the governor.

Insofar as private complainants seeking sanction under section 17A, the court said the provision nowhere requires only a police officer to seek sanction from a competent authority. The court further said it is in fact the duty of the private complainants to seek such approval.

Earlier, The High Court had completed its hearing in the case on September 12, and reserved its orders. It had also directed a special court in Bengaluru to defer further proceedings and not to take any precipitative action against the Chief Minister.

The case pertains to allegations that compensatory sites were allotted to Siddaramaiah's wife B M Parvathi in an upmarket area in Mysuru that had higher property value as compared to the location of her land that had been "acquired" by MUDA.

In a huge relief for Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal ahead of the Haryana elections, the Supreme Court has granted him bail in the Delhi excise policy case. The AAP chief will now be released from jail, six months after his arrest by the Enforcement Directorate on March 21. He was subsequently arrested by the CBI in June.

Here are some of the Supreme Court's key quotes:

•    Perception also matters and CBI must dispel the notion of being a caged parrot and must show it is an uncaged parrot. CBI should be like Caesar's wife, above suspicion. 

•    "No impediment in arresting person already in custody. We have noted that CBI in their application recorded reasons as to why they deemed necessary. There is no violation of Section 41A (3) of Code of Criminal Procedure," said Justice Surya Kant.

•    Justice Ujjal Bhuyan, however, noted, "CBI did not feel the need to arrest him (Mr Kejriwal) even though he was interrogated in March 2023 and it was only after his ED arrest was stayed that CBI became active and sought custody of Mr Kejriwal, and thus felt no need of arrest for over 22 months. Such action by the CBI raises serious question on the timing of the arrest and such an arrest by CBI was only to frustrate the bail granted in ED case."

•    Submission of additional solicitor general cannot be accepted that appellant has to first approach trial court for grant of bail. Process of trial should not end up becoming a punishment. Belated arrest by CBI is not justified.

•    Regarding building a public narrative of a case... Arvind Kejriwal shall not make any public comments about this case and be present for all hearings before trial court unless exempted.