State bans use of sirens during VIP movement: DGP issues strict order
The order, issued on Sunday, states that the use of sirens not only creates unnecessary disturbance on public roads but also potentially exposes the route of VIPs to unauthorized individuals, thereby increasing the risk to their security. Considering this, the DGP has directed that sirens must not be used for VIP convoys or movement.
The directive also highlights that sudden use of sirens on public roads can inconvenience other motorists and may lead to accidents, especially when vehicles are forced to make abrupt movements to make way.
The order recommends that any urgent coordination during VIP travel should be conducted through wireless communication channels rather than sirens.
According to the guidelines laid down in the order, only emergency service vehicles such as ambulances, police vehicles, and fire brigades may use sirens, and only in genuine emergency situations. The DGP further emphasised that as per Supreme Court directives, no vehicle other than emergency services is permitted to use sirens.
Even police vehicles are restricted from using sirens unless responding to an emergency.
Violation of this rule will attract legal action under Section 190(2) of the Motor Vehicles Act, which could result in a fine along with up to three months of imprisonment.
This decisive step by the Karnataka Police aims to ensure safer roads, reduce noise pollution, and maintain the secrecy and security of VIP movements.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
India.com
18 minutes ago
- India.com
Who is Ramya? actress who is getting death and rape threats for filing FIR against…
Home Entertainment Who is Ramya? actress who is getting death and rape threats for filing FIR against… Who is Ramya? actress who is getting death and rape threats for filing FIR against… South actress Ramya has been a victim of social media trolling, but this time popular Kannada actors fans have gone way to far. A prominent actress from the southern film industry, Ramya, celebrated for both her cinematic talent and political voice, is now facing an alarming wave of online abuse. Known for her outspoken nature, she has often found herself at odds with certain fan communities. But this time, things have escalated dangerously. Vicious threats, both violent and degrading, have been hurled at her, crossing every boundary of decency. Whose fan army is threatening Ramya? The actor we are talking about is Kannada actor Darshan Thoogudeepa, whose fans are threatening to kill and rape Ramya on social media. This whole case is also connected to the Renukaswamy murder case, in which actor Darshan is the prime accused. What has Ramya said in her statement? On July 28, Ramya filed a police complaint against those misbehaving online. The actress said that Kannada actor Darshan's fans are trolling her on social media and threatening rape and murder. Recently, Ramya had commented on the Renukaswamy murder case, in which Darshan is the accused. Since then, Darshan's fans have been threatening her. She said, 'Being a celebrity, I am used to trolling, but I have not faced it to this extent.' Ramya gave this statement on July 24. She had shared a report on Supreme Court proceedings in the Renukaswamy murder case, demanding justice for the victim's family. Ramya further said, 'The Supreme Court had questioned the bail granted to actor Darshan by the Karnataka High Court. I had said on the coverage of this news that the Supreme Court is a ray of hope for the common people of India and I hope that Renukaswamy will get justice. It was only after this that Darshan's fans started trolling me and started sending me extremely obscene messages and threatening to kill and rape me.' Who is Kannada actress Ramya? Ramya, also known as Divya Spandana, is a popular Kannada actress and former Member of Parliament. She made her acting debut with the film Abhi and went on to star in several hit Kannada films like Amrithadhare, Aryan, and Sanju Weds Geetha. Apart from her successful film career, she is known for her political role as a Congress MP from Mandya. Ramya is also known for her bold opinions on social issues and active presence on social media. For breaking news and live news updates, like us on Facebook or follow us on Twitter and Instagram. Read more on Latest Entertainment News on
India Today
an hour ago
- India Today
Supreme Court quashes FIR against Lakshya Sen in birth certificate forgery case
The Supreme Court on Monday quashed an FIR against badminton player Lakshya Sen, his family members and coach in the birth certificate forgery case. A bench of Justices Sudhanshu Dhulia and Aravind Kumar said the continuation of criminal proceedings against Sen was an abuse of the process of court. The top court observed the very allegations that were examined and debunked by competent authorities were now being sought to be revived as it ruled out any fresh evidence meriting reopening of the appellants, particularly appellant 1 and 3, are sportspersons of national standing, having represented India in international badminton tournaments and having earned multiple accolades, including medals at the Commonwealth Games and BWF international events," the court said. The top court went on, "To compel such individuals who have maintained an unblemished record and brought distinction to the country through sustained excellence,to undergo the ordeal of a criminal trial in the absence of prima facie material would not subserve the ends of justice."The invocation of criminal law in such circumstances, the bench held, would amount to an abuse of process, which this court cannot countenance. The top court observed the Sports Authority of India (SAI), upon receiving complaints, initiated a verification process in 2016, which included medical testing and factual players were stated to have undergone bone ossification and dental tests at government-run hospitals including AIIMS, Delhi."The findings of these tests supported the birth years as recorded in official documents. On that basis, the SAI closed the matter. The CVC, an independent oversight body, was also seized of the issue and recommended no disciplinary proceedings against D K Sen. These findings were accepted by the relevant authorities and have not been set aside or reopened," the bench M G Nagaraj alleged birth certificates of Sen and his brother Chirag Sen were top court was hearing a plea against a February 19 Karnataka High Court order rejecting the petitions filed by Sen, his family members, and his coach U Vimal high court found prima facie evidence, warranting an investigation into the alleged Sen's parents Dhirendra and Nirmala Sen, along with his brother, coach, and an employee of the Karnataka Badminton Association were involved in falsifying the birth to the complaint, the accused allegedly manipulated the birth certificates of the Sen brothers, reducing their age by approximately two-and-a-half alleged forgery was intended to allow them to participate in age-restricted badminton tournaments and avail government supported his claims with documents obtained under RTI Act and requested the court to summon original records from SAI and the Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports in New on the evidence, the court directed the High Grounds police station to conduct an police subsequently lodged an FIR under Sections 420 (cheating), 468 (forgery), and 471 (using forged documents as genuine) of petitioners moved the Karnataka High Court in 2022, securing an interim order, which stalled the argued the complaint and subsequent FIR were baseless, motivated, and intended to harass was alleged to have acted out of personal vendetta, after his daughter applied to join the Prakash Padukone Badminton Academy in 2020 but was not selected after the evaluation a coach at the academy, was named in the high court, while dismissing the petitions, observed the petitioners' counsel did not present arguments despite being given sufficient opportunities.- EndsTune InMust Watch
The Hindu
an hour ago
- The Hindu
Why did Justice Varma submit to in-house inquiry if it was contrary to Constitution, Supreme Court asks
The Supreme Court on Monday (July 28, 2025) questioned High Court judge Justice Yashwant Varma's choice to submit to an in-house inquiry procedure into an allegation of 'burnt cash' found at his official residential premises in Delhi, despite finding the procedure to be 'completely contrary to the Constitutional scheme'. A Bench of Justices Dipankar Datta and A.G. Masih asked whether he was at the time looking for a favourable outcome. Supreme Court hearing on Justice Varma's petition updates: SC asks Sibal to place on record the fact-finding committee report, adjourns case to July 30 The query came after senior advocate Kapil Sibal complained that the action taken by the Supreme Court at the time, including release of sensitive visual and audio materials showing 'burnt currency', 'convicted' Justice Varma in the public eye. 'There was a public furore, media interactions named the judge, accusations were levelled against the judge and the findings of the inquiry committee found its way into the public domain. He was convicted in the public eye from day one,' Mr. Sibal argued. Mr. Sibal said the process of removal of a judge was covered under Article 124(4) of the Constitution. The inquiry had to be done under the Judges Inquiry Act. The in-house procedure was meant to 'enhance' the moral vigour of the judiciary and depicted zero tolerance to judicial misconduct. 'Violation of Article 121' The senior counsel said the outing of sensitive material regarding a sitting High Court judge and very public discussions on his conduct violated the bar under Article 121 of the Constitution. 'Article 121 restricts discussions even in the Parliament on a sitting judge unless there is evidence of proven misconduct against him… Here, he was already 'convicted' in the public eye. The in-house inquiry procedure was devised to enhance the moral authority of the judiciary. The conduct of the in-house inquiry and its report, now in the public domain, hardly meet that objective,' Mr. Sibal argued. Mr. Sibal challenged the inquiry committee's finding of misbehaviour against Justice Varma. 'If cash is found in an outhouse, what is the behaviour of the judge to do with it… There is no 'behaviour' or 'misbehaviour' involved. They have to prove the cash belonged to him. They never found that… There could never have been a recommendation for my [read Justice Varma's] removal,' Mr. Sibal argued. 'Political overtones' The counsel said the issue of 'removal' of the judge has taken on political overtones. 'But removal is also a political procedure,' Justice Datta observed. 'Yes, inside the Parliament, not outside,' Mr. Sibal responded. 'You could have raised these points immediately, without submitting to the committee's jurisdiction… why did you not?' Justice Datta asked. Mr. Sibal contended that the decision of Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna (now retired) in May to forward the committee report and recommendation for the removal of Justice Varma was 'illegal'. 'Why do you think sending it to the President, who is the appointing authority of the judge, illegal? And what is wrong in sending it to the Prime Minister? He is the leader of the Council of Ministers. His advice is taken at the time of appointment of judges. Sending it to the President or the Prime Minister does not mean the Chief Justice is trying to impress or persuade the House to accept his point of view,' Justice Datta responded. The court listed the case on July 30, directing Mr. Sibal to place the inquiry committee's report on record.
