Bike Taxi ban in Karnataka: What do people say?
On June 16, app-based bike taxi operations screeched to a halt across Karnataka, following the Karnataka High Court's refusal to stay an earlier order mandating the suspension of such services.
#WeneedBikeTaxi continued to trend on social media, as students and IT professsionals have felt the loss of an economical, first and last mile option in the city.
We spoke to people to know their opinion about the ban.
Presentation: Nalme Nachiyar
Video & Editing: Ravichandran N
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Indian Express
3 days ago
- Indian Express
There is no legislation behind the creation of Sahyog portal, X argues in Karnataka High Court
The Karnataka High Court on Tuesday reserved its judgment on X Corp's challenge to central takedown orders issued for social media platforms under the Information Technology Act's section 79 (3) (b). In its closing arguments, X said there was no legal backing to the creation of the Sahyog portal, which it has called a 'censorship portal'. The Digipub News India Foundation, a non-profit organisation formed by digital news outlets, also made submissions before the single-judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna, which has been hearing the case. X has been arguing before the court that takedown orders against social media posts should be issued under Information Technology Act section 69A, and not section 79 (3) (b), stating that the latter section, along with certain rules, allows too much leeway for government officials to strip the 'safe harbour' provisions without a judicial process. 'Safe harbour' provisions protect intermediaries like X Corp from liability for content posted on their platforms by users. Objections have also been raised to the Sahyog portal, which the government has referred to as a way to 'automate the process of sending notices to intermediaries' but which X Corp has called a 'censorship portal'. The Centre has also argued that X is the only such intermediary not to join the portal. Making the last submissions for X in the case before the court, senior advocate K G Raghavan stated, 'Sahyog has no statutory backing and if there was a statutory backing, the law would have provided for it… upon consideration of the structure of the IT Act, it does not appear so.' He argued that section 26(2) of the IT Act indicated the circumstances in which such a website would be created, which was not found in the subsections of section 79 of the IT Act. He had also raised the possibility of conflict between the existing provisions, stating, 'Let us take a situation where one officer says 'I will use 79 (3) (b)'. Another officer says 'no, I should go under 69(A)' and all the procedure takes place – and the authority comes to the conclusion that it is not something we want to block… Direct conflict. This is exactly what should be prevented. 69(A) can be overridden by an officer sitting in any remote corner of the country.' Arguing on behalf of Digipub, senior advocate Aditya Sondhi stated, 'Even a subtle effort by the State….the right of a media house to hold land etc have all been found to be indirect methods of scuttling esteemed Solicitor General had placed some extreme examples of phishing, deepfakes etc to drive home the need for this sort of regulation. Extreme examples can make bad law.' He added, 'We need to deal with these, it cannot be disputed. But the use of the phrase 'unlawful act' in the rules being as vague…it is bereft of definition. If there is a need to fill a vacuum, it needs to be done legislatively and not in a roundabout manner.' The court subsequently reserved its judgment in the matter.
Time of India
4 days ago
- Time of India
Compensation can be enhanced even in insurer appeals if claimants seek: Karnataka high court
Bengaluru: The Karnataka High Court has ruled that the compensation in motor accident cases can be increased even when the appeal is filed by the insurer, provided the claimants orally seek such enhancement during arguments. The ruling came while hearing a case relating to the death of a 20-year-old pillion-rider in a 2013 road accident. "Such an interpretation is required to be made also keeping in mind the fact that the Motor Vehicles Act-1988 is a beneficial legislation," Justice CM Poonacha observed. The case pertained to a fatal crash on July 19, 2013, near Bengaluru city, in which Guruvanth, a telecaller, died while riding pillion on a motorcycle. The rider, Francis, sustained injuries. Both the victims' families filed separate compensation claims—Guruvanth's in Bengaluru and Francis' in Mandya. You Can Also Check: Bengaluru AQI | Weather in Bengaluru | Bank Holidays in Bengaluru | Public Holidays in Bengaluru The respective Motor Accident Claims Tribunals awarded nearly Rs 8.3 lakh (with 9% annual interest) to Guruvanth's family and nearly Rs 3 lakh (also with 9% interest) to Francis. Tata AIG General Insurance Company Ltd was directed to pay both sums. The insurer challenged the awards, primarily on grounds that the truck driver involved in the accident held an invalid licence. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like This Japanese AI invention allows you to speak 68 languages instantly. The idea? Genius. Enence 2.0 Undo During the hearings, however, the claimants sought higher compensation, which the insurer opposed, arguing that such enhancements were not permissible unless a formal cross-appeal was filed. Justice Poonacha rejected that position and noted that the driver's licence had expired on Aug 31, 2011 — well before the date of the accident — and was thus not valid. While holding the insurer liable to pay compensation, the court allowed the company to recover the amount from the vehicle's owner. Invoking the principle of "just compensation" under the Act, the court accepted the oral enhancement plea. It revised the notional income of the deceased from Rs 6,000 to Rs 8,000 per month, using the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority's income chart as reference. The reworked compensation stood at Rs 13,50,900 for Guruvanth's family and Rs 4,26,600 for Francis, both with 7% annual interest from the date of the original petitions until payment.
Indian Express
4 days ago
- Indian Express
Kerala couple accused in Bengaluru chit fund cheating case move Karnataka HC for quashing probe
A couple from Kerala, accused of cheating nearly 600 investors of over Rs 40 crore through a chit fund and finance business they operated in Bengaluru, have filed a petition in the Karnataka High Court for the quashing of the case registered against them. Tomy A Varghese, 57, and his wife, Shini Tomy, 52, moved the Karnataka High Court for the quashing of the cheating case registered against them at the Ramamurthy Nagar police station on July 5, and an interim order of a stay on the investigation by the state police's Criminal Investigation Department. On July 25, the Karnataka High Court granted the state police time to file objections in the case. According to police sources, the couple is suspected of having fled to Kenya on July 3 after selling an apartment they owned in East Bengaluru and their cars in a pre-planned effort to defraud the hundreds of investors in the A&A Chit Funds and Finance firm. They had been operating the firm in East Bengaluru since 2005. 'The travel history shows that they fled to Kenya on July 3, two days before an FIR was registered. The investigations have shown they sold all their property – apartment and car – for half the price before escaping, which shows that they intended to cheat. We have analysed their bank statements and documents,' a jurisdictional police officer said. The Ramamurthy Nagar police registered an FIR on July 5 based on a complaint by P T Savio, 64, an investor in the chit fund firm, who alleged that he had been duped of Rs 70 lakh in funds by the couple. They registered the case under Section 4 of the Chit Funds Act, 1982, under Section 21 of the Banning of Unregulated Deposit Schemes Ordinance 2019 (U/s-21), and under sections 318 and 316 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) for cheating and criminal breach of trust. In their initial investigations, the police found that 368 investors in A&A Chit Funds had been cheated of Rs 39.66 crore. The police said the Tomys had been operating their company for approximately 20 years, and used to offer interest rates ranging from 6 to 14 per cent.
