1

DALIT ONLINE – e News Weekly
Spreading the light of humanity & freedom
Editor: Nagaraja.M.R.. Vol.15..Issue.40……..06 / 10 / 2019

RTI Request to Honourable Chief Justice of India , DGs of Police Maharashta , Gujarath & Rajasthan
RTI Request Ref No: JUSTC/R/2019/52584
1. Why was Judge JT Utpat, Judge Loya’s predecessor in hearing the case, transferred from hearing the case despite a 2012 Supreme Court order specifying that the same judge should hear the matter from start to finish?
2. Were Bombay High Court Chief Justice Mohit Shah or the principal accused Amit Shah aware of any alleged inducements offered to Judge Loya to ensure a favourable judgment in the case?
3. Does Justice Mohit Shah deny the allegation by Judge Loya’s sister Anuradha Biyani, that he himself made an offer of Rs 100 crore in return for a favourable judgment?
4. Who made the arrangements for Judge Loya’s transportation to Dande Hospital on the night of his death, and why was this not in a vehicle from the government guest house or an ambulance?
5. Do Dande Hospital and/or Meditrina Hospital have records indicating what medication was provided to Judge Loya while in their care, and who was with him at the time?
6. What was the time of Judge Loya’s death according to the records of Meditrina Hospital and when do call records show this was intimated to Judge Loya’s family? Did the death occur at 6:15 am or before 5 am on 1 December 2014, or did it in fact occur before midnight?
7. In what circumstances can a person die of “coronary artery insufficiency”? Is it possible for a person in good physical health without any cardiac history or other markers of this condition, experience “coronary artery insufficiency” and lose their life
8. Why was a post-mortem report ordered into Judge Loya’s death when no panchnama or FIR was filed terming it a suspicious death, and why was Judge Loya’s family not informed about the performance of a post-mortem? Alternatively, were any reasons for performance of post-mortem report recorded, where were these recorded and who recorded them?
9. Who signed the post-mortem report pages as “maiyatacha chulatbhau” (ie paternal cousin brother of the deceased) when no relation of Judge Loya was present in Nagpur? Does the countersignatory, the senior police inspector of Sadar police station, recollect who this was?
10. What was Ishwar Baheti’s relationship with the deceased and on what basis was he coordinating the funeral arrangements for Judge Loya, including contacting the family? Why was Judge Loya’s phone returned to the family by Mr Baheti rather than the police? Alternatively, did the police ask Mr Baheti to return the phone to Judge Loya’s family?
11. Does Judge Loya’s family still have the allegedly bloodstained shirt worn by Judge Loya at the time of death which the post-mortem report claims was dry?
12. Is it true that the CBI was only given 15 minutes to argue against the discharge of Amit Shah in subsequent hearings of the case before Judge Loya’s successor in hearing the case, Judge Gosavi, as against three days for the defence lawyers?
13. Who made the decision to announce MS Dhoni’s retirement from test cricket on 30 December 2014? Was this decided by the player or the BCCI and did any external source suggest the specific date?
14. Sohrabuddin/Tulsirram Prajapati fake encounter case was transferred from Gujarat to CBI court, Mumbai by the Supreme Court in the year 2012, directing that same judge will preside over the trial from start to finish. Judge Utpat was designated as special CBI Judge in Mumbai. He allegedly reprimanded the accused for not appearing in his court and fixed the case for June 26, 2014. A day before, on June 25, 2014, he was abruptly transferred. Judge B.H. Loya was posted in his place. Judge Loya died in suspicious circumstances on November 30, 2014. Post that, shri Amit Shah has been since discharged and CBI refused to file an appeal against the order of the discharge.
15. Sister of Judge Loya gave an interview to a media house on November 21, 2017, to allege that he was being offered a Rs 100-crore bribe plus residential flat/property in Mumbai for delivering a verdict in favour of the accused by a former chief justice.
16. Judge Loya was stated to have died on account of heart attack. ECG and histopathology report of Judge Loya showed no evidence of heart attack. On the contrary, Dr R.K. Sharma, ex-head of Forensics & Toxicology at AIIMS stated that there was no evidence of heart attack and there was evidence of ‘possible trauma to the brain’.
17. Judge Loya’s security was withdrawn on November 24, 2014 in Mumbai and he was not provided any security as he travelled from Mumbai to Nagpur, where he died on November 30, 2014.
18. There is no travel record of Judge Loya travelling by train from Mumbai to Nagpur.
19. There is no entry or record of Judge Loya having stayed in the occupancy register of Ravi Bhavan, Nagpur on November 30, 2014. Fifteen employees posted in Ravi Bhavan, Nagpur did not even recall that Judge Loya ever stayed in Ravi Bhavan.
20. There was no reason for three judges to sleep in a room with only two beds when adjoining rooms were empty. Why did the 15 members of the staff then not know either about the stay or the heart attack? Why were no entries made in the occupancy register?
21. Family of Judge Loya has publicaly stated that clothes on his dead body had blood stains, especially near the neck area.
22. Post-mortem of Judge Loya was conducted on December 1, 2014 without information and consent of any immediate family members. There were discrepancies even in recording of Judge Loya’s name in post-mortem report.
23. Two of the other colleagues of Judge Loya, who were allegedly informed about the pressure being put on him, also died under suspicious circumstances. One associate, advocate Khandalkar’s body was found in district court, Nagpur after alleged fall from the eighth story on November 29, 2015. (November 28, 2015 was closed court work and he was missing for two days). Second associate, retired Judge Thombre died in suspicious circumstances while travelling in train from Nagpur to Bangalore on May 16, 2016. There is no FIR or an investigation in these deaths till date. One advocate Satish Uke, raising the issue narrowly escaped death when on July 8, 2016, heavy weight iron material of 5,000 kgs fell on his office.

24. What action taken against witnesses in sohrabuddin fake encounter case , ishrath jahan & tulsi ram prajapati fake encounter cases , haren pandya murder case who turned hostile after years ?

25. What action taken against police officials in sohrabuddin fake encounter case , ishrath jahan & tulsi ram prajapati fake encounter cases , haren pandya murder case who turned hostile changed prosecution after years and at the end preferred not to appeal in higher court ?
Edited, printed , published owned by NAGARAJA.M.R. @ # LIG-2 No 761,
HUDCO FIRST STAGE , OPP WATER WORKS , LAXMIKANTANAGAR , HEBBAL
,MYSURU – 570017 KARNATAKA INDIA Cell : 91 8970318202
WhatsApp 91 8970318202

Home page :
http://eclarionofdalit.dalitonline.in/ ,
https://dalit-online.blogspot.com/

Contact : editor@dalitonline.in , editor.dalitonline@gmail.com

Judges Practice before Preaching

DALIT ONLINE – e News Weekly
Spreading the light of humanity & freedom
Editor: Nagaraja.M.R.. Vol.15..Issue.39……..29 / 09 / 2019

“Who Stands In Judgment Should Be Incorruptible”: Court On Judge’s Appeal
The judicial officer, Shrirang Yadavrao Waghmare, was appointed as a Judicial Magistrate in 1985. He was dismissed from service on 2004.
Updated : September 22, 2019 03:12 IST

Supreme Court said findings on the magistrate’s conduct have been upheld by all courts (File)
New Delhi:
Falling for “gratification of lust” proved costly for a magistrate from Maharashtra, as the Supreme Court, unmoved by his pleas for leniency, upheld his dismissal from service citing “lacunae” in the purity of his character.
A bench comprising Justices Deepak Gupta and Aniruddha Bose said: “In our view the word ‘gratification’ does not only mean monetary gratification. Gratification can be of various types. It can be gratification of money, gratification of power, gratification of lust etc. In this case the officer decided the cases because of his proximate relationship with a lady lawyer and not because the law required him to do so.”
The judicial officer, Shrirang Yadavrao Waghmare, was appointed as a Judicial Magistrate in 1985. In February 2001, he was put under suspension and dismissed from service in January 2004. He could not get any relief from the High Court.
The Supreme Court noted that the purpose of deciding this appeal, it is foremost necessary to take into account the core allegation against him. “The allegation was that he had a proximate relationship with a lady lawyer and due to this relationship he passed certain judicial orders in favour of her clients, including her mother and brother when they were parties to certain proceedings,” observed the top court.
“His conduct is as such that no leniency can be shown and he cannot be visited with a lesser punishment,” observed the court.
The court noted that these findings on the magistrate’s conduct have been upheld by all courts and even the Supreme Court has not interfered with those findings.
Advertisement
“A Judge is judged not only by his quality of judgments but also by the quality and purity of his character. Impeccable integrity should be reflected both in public and personal life of a judge. One who stands in judgments over others should be incorruptible. That is the high standard which is expected of judges”, said the court.

Tale of 2 Judges
https://dalitsonline.blogspot.com/2019/08/tale-of-2-judges.html?m=1

Answer Honorable CJI and Karnataka DGP
https://dalitsonline.blogspot.com/2018/12/answer-honourable-judges-and-police.html?m=0

Interrogate Judges and Police

Youth Ki Awaaz
Is Sanjeev Bhatt’s Sentence An Indication Of India’s Dying Justice System?
Azaz Ahmad
On June 20, 2019, Gujarat’s former IPS officer Sanjeev Bhatt was sentenced to life imprisonment by a local court in a custodial death case, which goes back to 1990. Along with him a constable, too, was awarded the same sentence.
Sanjeev Bhatt is the same officer who had filed an affidavit in Supreme Court accusing Narendra Modi—the then Chief Minister of Gujarat—of “complicity in the 2002 riots”, which claimed the lives of over 1,200 people mostly Muslims, including women and children. The tragic riots were full of heinous crimes, one such being the gang rape of Bilkis Bano. The riots exposed how the entire government was involved in this state-sponsored ethnic cleansing of the Muslim community. But exposing their involvement has come with a cost for Bhatt.
Rakesh Asthana, another IPS officer from Gujarat, who was the police commissioner in Surat during Modi’s chief ministership, was appointed as a special director in CBI due to his long association with Modi. His appointment was controversial as he did not meet eligibility criteria, which was challenged in SC by an NGO. He was later moved out of CBI after being involved in a bribery case. Another example is DG Vanzara, the former inspector general who carried out the alleged fake encounter of Ishrat Jahan. He was subsequently acquitted by the blessings of the BJP government. Many officers have been punished for upholding their integrity—while those who compromised have been rewarded with promotions in the past many years.
Also read: Former IPS Officer Sanjiv Bhatt Sentenced To Life Imprisonment In 30 Year Old Case
Investigative journalist Rana Ayyub, published a book: “Gujarat Files: Anatomy of a Cover-Up,” exposing the complicity of the officers and BJP leaders including Amit Shah, in the Gujarat genocide. Rana Ayyub interviewed the masterminds of the Gujarat riots making videos of people talking proudly about killing Muslims and raping women.
All these are well documented facts, instances and indications which prove how the secular ethos of our democracy, and the justice system of India are being destroyed in broad daylight under the current regime.
Editorial : Match Fixing in Courts
An Appeal to Honorable Chief Justice of India
Take the recent case of inordinate delay in elevation of Judge Khureshi , Justice K M Joseph or transfers of Justice Tahilramani , Justice Jayanth Patel to name a few. The SCI collegium and the powers that be in government are afraid that if specific honest judges are elevated or continued in present office , crimes by vvips will come into open. Therefore both collegium and powers that be connive to eliminate them and get favorable judgements from others.
Honourable SCI judges must practice what they preach. Read the above articles and answer the Questions.

Edited, printed , published owned by NAGARAJA.M.R. @ # LIG-2 No 761,
HUDCO FIRST STAGE , OPP WATER WORKS , LAXMIKANTANAGAR , HEBBAL
,MYSURU – 570017 KARNATAKA INDIA Cell : 91 8970318202
WhatsApp 91 8970318202

Home page :
http://eclarionofdalit.dalitonline.in/ ,
https://dalit-online.blogspot.com/

Contact : editor@dalitonline.in , editor.dalitonline@gmail.com

Advocate Framed to Silence

DALIT ONLINE – e News Weekly
Spreading the light of humanity & freedom
Editor: Nagaraja.M.R.. Vol.15..Issue.38……..21 / 09 / 2019

Surat Advocate Alleges Harassment for Taking up Cases Against Police Officials
Human rights lawyer Bilal Kagzi says attempts are being made to silence him for exposing the police’s rampant abuse of the rule of law.

By Baljeet Kaur

When one speaks to Bilal Kagzi, a Surat-based human rights lawyer, it quickly becomes clear that he is an ardent practitioner of the law. In the profession for the last 12 years, Kagzi refers to several sections of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) and case laws to illustrate the procedure the police is required to follow when registering an FIR and initiating investigations and arrests.
According to Kagzi, the police in the area has been abusing the rule of law rampantly, leading to sufferings of poor and marginalised. He claims that those who stand up for the victims are also being intimidated and harassed to keep them quiet. He himself has been facing intimidation for taking up cases against police officials, and attempts are being made to silence him.
At present, the advocate is representing several who have complained against officials at the Kosamba police station over the alleged misuse of power and corruption in an assault case involving a right to information activist. Kagzi has in the past represented members of marginalised communities and regularly supports victims of atrocities and those who have struggled while seeking justice under the SC/ST Atrocities Act.
In another case, he is representing a woman at the Police Complaints Authority regarding the implication of her son in a false case. He is also representing another client at the Gujarat State Human Rights Commission over illegal detention and custodial torture by the police.
The most recent incident of his false implication in a case occurred a month ago. Incidentally, he was not even present at the place and time of the incident.
On the morning of August 12, Kagzi was spending time with his family after having returned from morning namaz. It was the occasion of Eid-ul-Adha. He was home till 8:40 am, after which he went to visit his aunt who lives nearby. Later that day, he came to know about a scuffle in his colony triggered by an accident between two vehicles. It was well-known that the parties involved had a past feud, because of which the present incident escalated.
When that afternoon Kagzi contacted a policeman regarding a case he was working on, he was shocked to learn that he was going to be named in an FIR related to this incident. For the next several hours, he tried gathering information about the incident and the police action on the same. At around 9:30 pm – the FIR in the case was registered at 8:30 pm, 12 hours after the incident occurred – he visited Kosamba police station to inquire about the case but was told that there were orders not to reveal names of the accused and the charges filed.
“An FIR is a public document and various court rulings have adjudged that a copy has to be given to the accused, so I asked one of my junior lawyers to visit the police station and collect the FIR,” he said.
An FIR – being a public document – is also supposed to be uploaded online within 24 hours of filing. But this particular one was uploaded much later. As per the document, Kagzi is ‘accused no. 3,’ charged under various sections of the IPC, including attempt to murder.
This, however, is not the first time Kagzi has faced intimidation for performing his duties as a lawyer. Last year, he was threatened by a local goon with death threats, but police paid no attention to his pleas.
Earlier, in 2012, he and his clients were illegally detained and beaten up at the same Kosamba police station. They had come to register a complaint against a local goon for destroying a road of the village and blocking the way. Advocate Kagzi was reportedly threatened that he would be killed in a police encounter for “worrying too much about human rights”.
Talking about his recent cases, he shared, “There is a lot of abuse of power by the police. On one hand, they will not take action against the powerful even when they give death threats to others, and on the other, incidents involving small fights among poor will lead to arrests without bail and even torture in custody.”
When the land of Chimnipatal village in Surat’s Umarpada – reserved as grazing ground for the Adivasi community – was given to a private company called GETCO in March, the protesting people were beaten up and arrested. In total, 32 were charged under two FIRs. Based on them, 25 were arrested, including some women.
“Article 20 of the constitution clearly states that two FIRs can’t be registered on the same facts against the same accused as it will lead to double jeopardy,” Kagzi said. He represented some of those who were arrested based on the two FIRs.
He describes another incident – of a fight between two groups – which was investigated by the Kamraj police station in June 2018. In the case, 33 persons including ten women were charged. “Few men were caught and detained at the police station. All of their relatives and friends who were visiting the police station to enquire were also being detained and named in this FIR. Later, the women who visited to look for their husbands, brothers and sons were also booked in the same case.”
In this case, many were kept in illegal detention for 19 hours and beaten up in custody. During their appearance before the magistrate, they complained against the police officials. Later, a court enquiry found the allegations of torture in custody as legitimate and issued a notice against the involved policemen.
Kagzi further narrates, “The ordeal of these people did not end there. As soon as they were released on bail by the court, police detained them under Section 151 of the CrPC – preventive detention. They were released a day later and then put on the habitual offenders list.”
Coming back to the August incident, as soon as he got hold of the FIR, he collected evidence, including CCTV footage, and approached the police station. He submitted in writing to the superintendent of police and the investigation officer of the case, but did not get any response. “The police should have recorded my statement and taken cognisance of the evidence I presented to defend myself. After a fair investigation, when they would not have found any evidence against me, they should have filed a ‘B’ summary report regarding the wrongful information”. But nothing of this sort happened
CCTV footage shows Bilal Kagzi was at his home at the time of the incident.
Then, on August 19, Kagzi filed for an anticipatory bail in the Gujarat high court. He argued that the case had been filed over personal vengeance. An official even confided in Kagzi that police constables had, in fact, informed in their statement that he was not involved in the incident, but these statemen7ts were suppressed by police officers. The court then granted him anticipatory bail on August 27.
He has filed another mandamus writ petition in the Gujarat high court seeking directions for the police to conduct a fair and independent investigation. While this petition is pending, the police have still not taken the evidence he presented into consideration. “After my written submission, the police should have – as per law – collected CCTV footage in the presence of two panchas. Though I have a copy of the footage, the procedure requires the collection of the original footage by the police, which they are deliberately delaying. After 30 days, the original footage will get overwritten and will be lost,” Kagzi said.
Kagzi is not alone. Lawyers and human rights defenders like him are fighting against intimidation and harassment to ensure justice for the oppressed.

Editorial : Put Police behind bars
– An Appeal to Honorable Chief Justice of India
In the above case of hum rights advocate / lawyer , police & district administration are hand in glove with criminals. Immediately order for an impartial inquiry into the matter , protect the advocate and legally prosecute responsible public servants.
Jai Hind. Vande Mataram.

Home page :
http://eclarionofdalit.dalitonline.in/ ,
https://dalit-online.blogspot.com/

Contact : editor@dalitonline.in , editor.dalitonline@gmail.com

Journalist SILENCED

DALIT ONLINE – e News Weekly
Spreading the light of humanity & freedom
Editor: Nagaraja.M.R.. Vol.15..Issue.37……..15 / 09 / 2019

India reporter fears for life after exposing corruption
Concerns raised over media freedom as Pawan Kumar Jaiswal, who exposed corruption in school meal scheme, faces arrest
•

NEWS /INDIA
India reporter fears for life after exposing corruption
Concerns raised over media freedom as Pawan Kumar Jaiswal, who exposed corruption in school meal scheme, faces arrest.
by Mohammad Ali

New Delhi, India – An Indian journalist says he and his family are living in fear after police filed criminal cases against him for exposing corruption in a school midday meal scheme in Uttar Pradesh state.
Police have filed four criminal cases against Pawan Kumar Jaiswal for filing a video report that showed a school in Mirzapur district serve children only “roti” (or Indian bread) with salt.
As part of the state-run midday meal scheme run across government schools in India, children are supposed to be served cooked food to fight malnutrition – a major problem in the country.
“The reality is that me and my family are living in fear. The district administration is behaving vindictively to save themselves and their role in the mismanagement of the midday meal scheme,” Jaiswal, who is a reporter with Jansandesh Times, a local newspaper, told Al Jazeera.
The video report, showing children eating roti with salt without any vegetables and “daal” (or split pulse) at the Mirzapur school went viral last month, causing public outrage.
‘Defaming the government’
In the cases filed by the authorities, they accuse Jaiswal of defaming the state government headed by the Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP).
The local officials accused Jaiswal and his source Rajkumar Pal under various sections of the Indian Penal Code including sections 120 B (criminal conspiracy), 186 (voluntarily obstructing public servants in discharge of his functions), 193 (false evidence) and 420 (cheating) on August 31.
“When Jaiswal and his source Rajkumar Pal who tipped him off, got to know that vegetable was not available in the school, instead of ensuring that the kids were served with vegetables, they criminally conspired to falsely defame the state government and recorded a video of students eating only roti and salt,” says the police complaint, a copy of which is with Al Jazeera.
Jaiswal says he wanted to do his job by exposing the corruption in the midday meal scheme in the district. He said that the school had been serving kids rice, roti and salt for several weeks.
Despite finding Jaiswal’s report true, the state government is yet to withdraw the complaint against him which means that he could be arrested at any time.
“I went to the school on August 22 when I found [out] that the school was serving rotis and rice with salt on different days. Seeing the kids eat just roti with salt melted my heart. I just wanted to ensure the kids are served nutritious food in midday meal as mandated by the law. So I reported it,” Jaiswal told Al Jazeera telephonically from Mirzapur.
‘Local journalists scared’
“All local journalists are extremely scared. We will certainly think 10 times before reporting,” said Jaiswal, concerned about his safety as police have already arrested his source in the village.
The district magistrate of Mirzapur, Anurag Patel, justified the police action against Jaiswal, saying that he should not have recorded a video because he is a print journalist.
Despite repeated attempts, Al Jazeera could not reach BJP leaders for a response.
Journalists in Uttar Pradesh – India’s most populous state – and in the capital New Delhi, however, have come to Jaiswal’s support.
Dozens of local reporters in Mirzapur organised a “pen-down” protest on Tuesday over the police action which has come barely two months after a Delhi-based freelance journalist was picked up from his home by the Uttar Pradesh police.
Prashant Kanojia was arrested in June for criticising Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath – a hard line Hindu monk known for his anti-Muslim stance. Kanojia was released after the intervention of the Supreme Court.
Press freedom in India has deteriorated since Prime Minister Narendra Modi came to power in 2014.
Attack on press freedom
Journalists in Indian-administered Kashmir, which has been placed under a crippling lockdown for a month, have complained of harassment by authorities.
Due to its crackdown on freedom of the press, India dropped down two places in the global press freedom index of Reporters sans Frontieres (RSF), a Paris-based independent media watchdog. India is ranked 140th out of 180 countries, placed below Myanmar and Afghanistan.
The Editors Guild of India, a prominent Indian body of editors, termed the move “a clear and classic case of shooting the messenger”.
“It is precisely exposes like these that show how valuable free and fearless journalists are to a democratic society. It is shocking that instead of taking action to fix what is wrong on the ground, the government has filed criminal cases against the journalists,” said a statement issued by the guild on September 2.
The New York-based Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) and RSF have condemned the state action against Jaiswal.
The CPJ called on authorities to “immediately cease pursuing charges” against Jaiswal.
“Exposing wrongdoing is not defamatory, but rather part of a reporter’s job, and filing a case against him is a form of harassment and intimidation,” said Aliya Iftikhar, a senior Asia researcher with the CPJ.
Scared of further persecution by the government, Jaiswal has released several videos on social media pleading that he is innocent.
“I have done no wrong. I did what a reporter is supposed to do,” Jaiswal told Al Jazeera.
Editorial : Protect Journalists and Press Freedom
An Appeal to Honorable Chief Justice of India
Protect Journalists.

Home page :
http://eclarionofdalit.dalitonline.in/ ,
https://dalit-online.blogspot.com/

Contact : editor@dalitonline.in , editor.dalitonline@gmail.com

An Indian journalist participates in a silent protest against the brutal killing of a senior Kashmiri journalist Shujaat Bukhari, portrait seen, in Kolkata, India, Friday, June 15, 2018. Bukhari and his two police bodyguards were fatally shot Thursday by assailants in Indian-controlled Kashmir. (AP Photo/Bikas Das)

A total of 81 journalists were killed this year, 348 are currently in prison, and 60 are being held hostage, according to the annual worldwide round-up of deadly violence and abusive treatment of journalists released Tuesday by Reporters Without Borders (RSF), which shows an unprecedented level of hostility towards media personnel.
The widely reported murders of Saudi columnist Jamal Khashoggi and the young Slovak data journalist Ján Kuciak highlighted the lengths to which press freedom’s enemies are prepared to go. More than half of the journalists killed in 2018 were deliberately targeted.
Violence against journalists has reached unprecedented levels this year, and the situation is now critical. The hatred of journalists that is voiced, and sometimes very openly proclaimed, by unscrupulous politicians, religious leaders and businessmen has tragic consequences on the ground, and has been reflected in this disturbing increase in violations against journalists.
RSF Secretary-General Christophe Deloire said.
Afghanistan: the world’s deadliest country for journalists in 2018
Afghanistan was the world’s deadliest country for journalists in 2018, with 15 killed. It was followed by Syria, with 11 killed, and Mexico, the deadliest country outside a conflict zone, with nine journalists murdered in 2018. The fatal shooting of five employees of the Capital Gazette newspaper in June brought the United States into the ranks of the deadliest countries.
China remains the world’s biggest jailer of journalists
The number of journalists detained worldwide at the end of the year – 348 – is up from 326 at this time last year. As in 2017, more than half of the world’s imprisoned journalists are being held in just five countries: China, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Turkey.
China remains the world’s biggest jailer of journalists with 60 currently held, of whom three quarters are non-professional journalists.
Reuters reporters jailed for investigating Rohingya massacre in Myanmar
Despite international protests, Kyaw Soe Oo and Wa Lone, two Burmese journalists employed by the Reuters news agency who have been held since December 2017, were sentenced to seven years in prison in Yangon on 3 September. They were convicted on a trumped-up charge of violating the Official Secrets Act in reprisal for investigating a massacre of Rohingya civilians by soldiers in the village of Inn Dinn, in the north of Rakhine state, in September 2017.
Detained Reuters journalist Wa Lone is escorted by police while arriving for a court hearing in Yangon, Myanmar on Thursday. (Reuters photo)
The army had been forced to acknowledge the massacre and seven soldiers were given ten-year jail sentences for their role in the bloodshed. The sole evidence against the two reporters was the supposedly classified documents found in their possession at the time of their arrest. However, a police officer testified during a preliminary hearing that they had been lured to a meeting where they were given the documents and then immediately arrested. The journalists have appealed the decision.
Journalists also live in fear in India
Journalists also live in fear in India. Six were murdered this year and many others were the targets of murder attempts, physical attacks, and threats. Hate campaigns against journalists, including incitement to murder, are common on social networks and are fed by troll armies linked to the Hindu nationalist right.
India has emerged in the world’s five deadliest countries for journalists alongside a first-time entrant in the list – the United States.
Those who murder journalists often use extremely barbaric methods. A village chief in the northeastern Indian state of Bihar killed two journalists, Navin Nischal and Vijay Singh, in retaliation for their reporting by deliberately running them down with his SUV on 25 March. On the same day in the central state of Madhya Pradesh, a dump truck was used to run down and kill Sandeep Sharma, a journalist who had been investigating a local “sand mafia.”
Journalist killed in India
Achyutananda Sahu
Doordarshan | Killed in Chhattisgarh, India | October 30, 2018
Video journalist Achyutananda Sahu, who worked for the government-run broadcaster Doordarshan, was killed in Chhattisgarh on October 30, 2018, during a firefight between police and a Maoist militant group, according to news reports.
Chandan Tiwari
Aj Newspaper | Killed in Chatra, India | October 30, 2018
Chandan Tiwari, a local reporter with Hindi daily Aj in Jharkhand’s Chatra district, was abducted and badly beaten on October 29, 2018. Police said the reporter was found injured in a forest about 175 miles from Pathalgada, in Jharkhand. He succumbed to his injuries the next day, according to NDTV.
Navin Nischal
Dainik Bhaskar | Killed in Arrah, India | March 25, 2018
Navin Nischal, a stringer for the Hindi-language daily, Dainik Bhaskar, was killed on the evening of March 25, 2018, after an SUV ran him over in the town of Arrah in India’s Bihar state.
Sandeep Sharma
News World | Killed in Ghazipur district, India | March 26, 2018
Sandeep Sharma, a reporter for the local News World television channel in Madhya Pradesh state’s Bhind district, was killed on March 26, 2018. He was driving on his motorbike to a government event when a truck veered into him and ran him over, according to the channel’s bureau chief, Vikas Purohit, who witnessed the collision, and a report by NDTV. Purohit told CPJ that he took Sharma to the local hospital where the journalist was declared dead from injuries sustained in the crash.
Shujaat Bukhari
Rising Kashmir | Killed in Srinagar city, India | June 14, 2018
Several unidentified gunmen fired at Shujaat Bukhari, 50, outside his office as he was leaving for an iftar party (the meal that breaks the Ramadan fast), according to media reports. He suffered injuries to the head and abdomen, according to a report on the Free Press Kashmir news website. Two police officers, who had been assigned to protect him after an attack in 2000, were also fired at, the reports said. All three were rushed to the Shri Maharaja Hari Singh hospital where they died, according to newsreports. The Rising Kashmir office is located in Srinagar city’s Press Colony, a high-security zone that houses other media organizations, according to a report in The Telegraph newspaper.
India has lost a fearless journalist who risked his life, every day, every hour and every minute.

Three journalists reported missing in 2018
The two journalists reported missing last year in Pakistan and Bangladesh are no longer missing, but RSF registered three new disappearances in 2018 — two of them in the Americas and one in Russia.
Jamal Khashoggi (Saudi Arabia)
Dissident Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi’s murder inside the Saudi consulate in Istanbul on 2 October sparked international outcry. Reported missing until the Saudi authorities acknowledged his murder, Khashoggi was strangled and then dismembered, according to Turkish authorities. The operation was reportedly carried out by a team that was dispatched from Saudi Arabia for this express purpose and left immediately afterwards. Living in self-imposed exile in the United States, Khashoggi had gone to the consulate to get the papers he needed to marry his Turkish fiancée. His shocking murder highlighted the appalling nature of the Saudi regime and Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman’s oppressive methods. More than 160 NGOs asked the UN secretary-general to launch an independent international inquiry into Khashoggi’s death.
“Nobody dares to speak” said Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi before his forced disappearance

Yaser Murtaja and Ahmed Abu Hussein (Palestine)
Although clearly identified as a journalist, Yaser Murtaja, 30, was fatally shot by an Israeli army sniper on 6 April while covering one of a series of “Great Return March” demonstrations by Palestinians on the border between the Gaza Strip and Israel. Another Palestinian journalist, Ahmed Abu Hussein, 25, was fatally shot while covering a similar protest at the border two weeks later. Witnesses said he was in a calm area 700 metres from the border when he was brought down by a clearly deliberate shot.

Reporters Without Borders (RSF) is an international non-governmental, non-profit organization with a recognized public interest function that has consultative status with the United Nations, UNESCO, the Council of Europe, the International Organization of the Francophonie and the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights. Headquartered in Paris, it has bureaux, sections or representatives in 17 cities (Berlin, Brussels, Geneva, Helsinki, Istanbul, Karachi, Kiev, London, Madrid, Mexico City, Rio de Janeiro, San Francisco, Stockholm, Taipei, Tunis, Vienna and Washington), correspondents in 130 countries and 15 local partner organizations.

Editorial: How many more journalists you want dead
– An Appeal to Honorable Chief Justice of India and Honorable Chairman National Human Rights Commission
Immediately order for impartial inquiries into cases of murders of journalists, assaults on journalists & threats to journalists. Legally prosecute and punish public servants who bury the cases.
Jai Hind.
Edited, printed , published owned by NAGARAJA.M.R. @ # LIG-2 No 761,
HUDCO FIRST STAGE , OPP WATER WORKS , LAXMIKANTANAGAR , HEBBAL
,MYSURU – 570017 KARNATAKA INDIA Cell : 91 8970318202
WhatsApp 91 8970318202

Home page :
http://eclarionofdalit.dalitonline.in/ ,
https://dalit-online.blogspot.com/

Contact : editor@dalitonline.in , editor.dalitonline@gmail.com

Judge in Trouble

DALIT ONLINE – e News Weekly
Spreading the light of humanity & freedom
Editor: Nagaraja.M.R.. Vol.15..Issue.36……..08 / 09 / 2019

Bihar Judge in trouble for questioning corruption in judiciary

Justice Rakesh Kumar, who is the senior most judge, said in his order on Wednesday, that corruption in High Court is (an) open secret. He also made scathing remarks on the prevailing situation in state judiciary and publicly pointed out corruption in lower courts.

The Patna High Court Chief Justice on Thursday issued a notice to withdraw all cases from a senior judge after he alleged corruption in judiciary while hearing a case against a former IAS officer.
According to a notice issued by the order of the Patna High Court Chief Justice, “all matters pending before Justice Rakesh Kumar, sitting singly including tired up/part heard or otherwise stand withdrawn with immediate effect”.
“Justice Rakesh Kumar will await in chambers for work assignments until ordered otherwise” notice issued by the order of Chief Justice of Patnaa High Court said.
Justice Rakesh Kumar, who is the senior most judge, said in his order on Wednesday, that corruption in High Court is (an) open secret. He also made scathing remarks on the prevailing situation in state judiciary and publicly pointed out corruption in lower courts.
Justice Rakesh Kumar, while hearing the bail application of former IAS officer K. P. Ramiah, had questioned how he was granted bail by a lower court when the High Court as well as the Supreme Court had rejected his request for protection from arrest because of the gravity of the allegations.
Justice Kumar said a “corrupt officer” like Ramaiah secured bail as a vacation judge heard his case in place of the regular judge of the Vigilance Court, who was away for a day.
The judge also alleged that the full bench of the Patna High Court had taken a lenient view every time the case of any judge from the lower judiciary came up. “Despite my opposition, a judge facing serious charges was let off with minor punishment instead of an exemplary one,” Justice Kumar had said in his order.
Justice Kumar also hit out at High Court judges for wasting public money by choosing to stay in guest houses for months on the pretext of renovating the government bungalows allotted to them.
Justice Kumar ordered that a copy of his Wednesday order be served to the Chief Justice of India, Prime Minister’s office and Union Ministry of Law and Justice.
Ramiah is accused of embezzling over Rs. 5 crore from the Bihar Mahadalit Vikas Mission, a state government scheme for deprived and marginalised Dalits.

Madras High Court Acknowledges Corruption In Judiciary, Calls It The Greatest Threat To Constitution

In unprecedented remarks, the Madras High Court on Thursday (28 March) noted that even the judiciary was infested with corruption and that corrupt judicial officers and public servants should be declared “anti-nationals,” reports Times of India (TOI).
“They are anti-nationals because they are obstructing the development of this great nation. Terrorists are declared as anti-social elements. Thus, persons corrupt and acting against the developmental activities of our nation are also to be declared as anti-nationals. These anti-nationals do not care about the development of this country but are only interested in their self-development,” Justice Subramaniam said.
Justice S M Subramaniam of the court noted that corruption in the judiciary was the “greatest enemy of the Constitution” and that it was imperative that wide-ranging reforms are initiated to reign in corruption in the courts.
“It is painful and unfortunate to state that sexual favours are demanded in lieu of bribe in educational institutions and public offices and what else can be worse than this in public administration,” Justice Subramaniam added.
First Step
Recently President Ram Nath Kovind appointed former Supreme Court judge Justice Pinaki Chandra Ghose as India’s first Lokpal. The Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act, 2013 was passed by Indian Parliament paving the way for the establishment of a Lokpal (Ombudsman) to fight corruption in public offices and ensure accountability on the part of public officials, including the prime minister.

SC turns to CBI, police to curb graft in registry

https://www.google.com/amp/s/m.timesofindia.com/india/sc-to-depute-senior-officers-from-cbi-delhi-police-to-prevent-corruption-in-registry/amp_articleshow/70120691.cms ,
FIR against High Court Judge Shukla

Justice SN Shukla of the Allahabad High Court has become the first sitting high court judge to be prosecuted while in office in nearly three decades. Chief Justice of India Ranjan Gogoi has allowed the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to lodge an FIR against Justice Shukla.
The case relates to medical admission scam. Justice Shukla is accused of favouring a private medical college by extending the deadline for admission of students in contravention of the existing rules.
Prosecution of judges of the high court and the Supreme Court were not allowed till July 1991 when the top court provided for lodging FIR against them in the landmark Veeraswamy case. Justice Veeraswamy of the Madras High Court had been booked in a case of corruption in 1976.
He challenged the government’s decision saying that law gives immunity to judges of the appellate courts from prosecution. The matter reached Supreme Court, which in 1991 allowed prosecution of judges of the high court and the Supreme Court but only after getting nod for the same from the Chief Justice of India.
Justice Shukla’s prosecution is the first such case since the 1991 Supreme Court judgment. The decision followed an elaborate process of investigation by an internal panel of the Supreme Court which found Justice Shukla guilty of misconduct and deliberately delivering erroneous judgment to benefit the private medical college.
This comes only a few days after Justice Shukla requested CJI Gogoi to restore judicial functions to his jurisdiction. CJI Gogoi had ordered to take away his judicial functions in January 2018. He had also recommended, in a letter to Prime Minister Narendra Modi last month, removal of Justice Shukla from his position.

Editorial : How many voices you will silence CJI ?
In the past , Justice Karnan was jailed for speaking truth – corruption in judiciary. Judge Prabhakar Gawli dismissed from service for acting against corrupt. Now Justice Rakesh Kumar paying the price for speaking truth. Supreme court judges , high court judges instead of conducting fair investigation, prosecution into the charges and upholding law / truth are aiding corrupt, criminals by silencing voices seeking justice. .
Hereby , we urge Honourable Chief Justice of India to order an impartial inquiry , to protect the constitutional duties of victimized judges.

Jai Hind. Vande Mataram.

Home page :
http://eclarionofdalit.dalitonline.in/ ,
https://dalit-online.blogspot.com/

Contact : editor@dalitonline.in , editor.dalitonline@gmail.com
•

PIL – Enforce Torture

DALIT ONLINE – e News Weekly
Spreading the light of humanity & freedom
Editor: Nagaraja.M.R.. Vol.15..Issue.35……..01 / 09 / 2019
PIL – 3rd Degree Torture for Corrupt Police Corrupt Judges
An Appeal to Honourable Supreme Court of India , Karnataka High Court & National Human Rights Commission

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. OF 2018
IN THE MATTER OF

NAGARAJA . M.R
editor DALIT ONLINE
# LIG 2 , No 761 ,, HUDCO First Stage , Laxmikantanagar ,
Hebbal , Mysore – 570017 , Karnataka State
….Petitioner

Versus
Honourable Union Home Secretary , GOI

Honourable Chief Secretary , Government of Karnataka & Others
….Respondents

PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 12 to ARTICLE 35 & ARTICLE 51A OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS UNDER ARTICLE 32 & ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA.

To ,
Hon’ble The Chief Justice of India and His Lordship’s Companion
Justices of the Supreme Court of India. The Humble petition of the
Petitioner above named.

MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH :

1. Facts of the case:
Only in a free & fair atmoshphere without undue influence or pressure , a person can tell truth. Recently in many high profile cases like Sohrabuddin fake encounter case witnesses are turning hostile , but courts are not taking action against the responsible police. In few other cases , police use 3rd degree torture methods on suspects to fit them in the cases. Even when the accused appeals to judge for his protection from 3rd degree torture by police , judge still remands him to police custody. Example Gauri Lankesh case.

2. Question(s) of Law:
Is it not the duty of presiding judge of a case to ensure safety of defendant , accused , complainant & witnesses ? When police or others use 3rd degree torture on accused , witnesses , etc are NOT such Police & Judge Punishable ?
If Judges , Police , Advocates have accepted 3rd degree torture as a right method to elicit truth from suspects, ok. When police subject an accused / a commoner to 3rd degree torture about a crime / theft of hundred rupees , why not police who have robbed crores of rupees ( dacoity by police near yelwal mysuru ) are subjected to 3rd degree torture by their colleagues? why not police torture former DGP for his involvement in lottery scam ? Why not police torture their colleagues who have links , pass information to Dawood Ibrahim ? Why not police torture Present CJI Dipak Mishra to elicit truth about fake affidavit , kalikho pul case , Prasad education trust ? Why not police torture Karnataka high court judges involved in mysore roost resort sex scandal ? All for eliciting truth. Why NOT ?

3. Grounds:

Requests for equitable justice , equal treatment of prisoners. Requests of stopping torture of poor prisoners. Prosecution of corrupt judges , police & jail personnel.

4. Averment:
Hereby , I do request the honorable supreme court of India to consider this as a PIL for : “writ of Mandamus” and to issue instructions to the concerned public servants in the cases to perform their duties.

b. Hereby , I do request the honorable supreme court of India to immediately annul the Jail Manuals of all state governments of india , which are discriminatory.
c. Hereby , I do request the honorable supreme court of India to constitute an expert committee to frame a “ Model Jail Manual “ applicable to all Indian states , union territories.
d. Hereby , I do request the honorable supreme court of India to initiate legal prosecution of jail personnel , police & judges who failed in their duties to ensure safety of prisoners , resulting in torture of prisoners and for prolonged imprisonment or illegal imprisonment of innocents.
e. Hereby , I do request the honorable supreme court of India to order all state governments to ensure food , health care , recreational facilities , parole on an equal footing to all prisoners without discrimination.
f. Hereby , I do request the honorable supreme court of India to order respective state governments pay compensation to prisoners for suffering discrimination , torture.
g. Hereby , I do request the honorable supreme court of India to order respective state governments pay compensation to prisoners who spent years behind bars , finally acquitted by courts and in the case of prisoners who spent more years in jail than the quantum of punishment codified in IPC due to prolonged case trials. In both such cases afterwards state government must recover money from respective presiding judges , investigation officer & government legal prosecutor.
h. Hereby , I do request the honorable supreme court of India to order Government of Karnataka to provide protection to all the accused in Gauri Lankesh Case and to legally prosecute the guilty police officials for attempt to murder charges. Also to legally prosecute the presiding judge of the case who failed to do his duty in protecting the accused.
i. In Sohrabuddin Fake Encounter Case hostile witnesses have crossed 50 numbers. Either now they are under police threat, pressure &are lying orelse years back they were under police threat , pressure and lied previously. Either the present police are guilty or the previous ones. Therefore honourable court must first prosecute responsible police for criminal charges of covering up crime, cheating & misleading the court , contempt of court. Also the advocates of case at that time who together with guilty police mislead the court must also be prosecuted for the same criminal charges. Above all the judge who failed to protect witnesses from police threat must be prosecuted. Otherwise it is no justice , only power of ruling elite who always wins.

j. to order state police , central intelligence to subject the police officials , judges also to 3rd degree torture methods when they face allegations of corruption , illegalities , to elicit truth just as in the case of commoners. FAIR JUSTICE.

k. to pass such other orders and further orders as may be deemed necessary on the facts and in the circumstances of the case.

FOR WHICH ACT OF KINDNESS, THE PETITIONER SHALL BE DUTY BOUND, EVER PRAY.

Dated : 03rd July 2018 …………………. FILED BY: NAGARAJA.M.R.

Place : Mysuru , India…………………….PETITIONER-IN-PERSON

CRIMINALS IN POLICE UNIFORM
– An appeal to union home minister & Karnataka state home minister

The ABC of police force in India is apathy ,
brutality & corruption . in India, police are not impartially enforcing
law instead are working as hand maidens of rich & mighty. The corrupt
police officers are collecting protection money from criminals ,
collecting money to go slow on investigations , to file B- reports , to
fix innocents in fake cases , to murder innocents in lock-up /
encounters . they are hand in league with land mafia , today C.M of
Karnataka himself issued a warning to police officials about this.
Even in lock-ups , jails, the rich inmates bribe
officials get better food from outside , mobile phones , drugs , drinks
, cigareetes , etc. they get spacious cells & get best private medical
care . where as the poor inmates are even denied food , health care ,
living space as per the provisions of law. The corrupt jail officials
instigate rowdy elements in the jails to assault poor inmates & to toe
their line. More corrupt the police more wealthier he is. Even CBI
officials are no different. The only beacon of hope is still there are
few honest people left in the police force.
Hereby , e-voice urges you to make public the following
information in the interest of justice.

1.how many CBI officials & Karnataka state police officials are facing
charges of corruption , 3rd degree torture , lock-up/encounter deaths
, rapes , fake cases , etc ?

2.how you are monitoring the ever increasing wealth of corrupt police
officials?

3.how many officials from the ranks of constable to DGP have amassed
illegal wealth?

4.what action you have taken in these cases ? have you got
reinvestigated all the cases handled by tainted police?

5.how many policemen have been awarded death penalty & hanged till
death , for cold blooded murders in the form of lock-up deaths /
encounter deaths ?

6.why DGP of Karnataka is not registering my complaint dt 10/12/2004 ,
subsequent police complaints ?
is it because rich & mighty are involved ?

7.e – voice is ready to bring to book corrupt police officials subject to
conditions, are you ready ?

8.how many police personnel are charged with violations of people’s
human rights & fundamental rights ?

9.how many STF police deployed to nab veerappan were themselves
charged with theft of forest wealth?

10.how you are ensuring the safety , health , food , living space of
inmates in jails?

11.how you are ensuring the medical care , health of prisoners in
hospitals & mental asylums?

12.How you are ensuring the safety , health , food , living space of
inmates in juvenile homes ?
Scrap police torture: Amit Shah

The home minister said forensic evidence was the need of the hour for police investigators to clinch convictions

•

Shah proposed a paradigm shift in the approach to policing and called for a countrywide consultative process to make changes to the IPC and the CrPC(PTI file photo)

Union home minister Amit Shah on Wednesday stressed the need for police reforms and suggested that the force do away with the age-old third-degree torture and adopt more scientific and new methods of investigation to stay ahead of criminals.
Speaking at the 49th foundation day celebrations of the Bureau of Police Research and Development (BPRD), the home minister said: “This is not an era of third-degree (torture) and the police need to adopt scientific methods and (study) forensic evidence for investigation to nail criminals. Police must think four steps ahead of criminals and criminal-minded people.”
Advocating police reforms, Shah said the conviction ratio in criminal cases in the country was “very pitiful” and age-old policing techniques such as third-degree torture and phone tapping would no longer help curb crimes or secure convictions.
The home minister said forensic evidence was the need of the hour for police investigators to clinch convictions.
Shah drew a distinction between police reforms and reforms in policing, and urged the BPRD to take the lead in the latter.
Shah proposed a paradigm shift in the approach to policing and called for a countrywide consultative process to make changes to the IPC and the CrPC.
He announced that a police university and a forensic science university would be set up at the national level.
Physical Abuse, Electric Shocks and Torture: What a Supreme Court Ordered Study Found in Haryana Jails

The methods of torture stated in the report include verbal abuse and slapping, as well as more extreme methods such as giving electric shocks, water boarding, sleep deprivation, harm to sexual parts of the body.
Allegations of “degrading and inhuman treatment, including torture, during police remand” have surfaced in Haryana prisons in a Supreme Court-ordered report on prison conditions in India.
The report, Inside Haryana Prisons, was commissioned by the Haryana State Legal Services (HSLS) in compliance with a 2013 order passed by the apex court in ‘Re: Inhuman Conditions in 1382 Prisons’ and was prepared by the Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative (CHRI) after interviewing 475 prisoners across 19 prisons in the state.
“Out of 475 inmates that the CHRI team interacted with, 227 (47.78%) said that they had been subjected to degrading and inhuman treatment, including torture, during police remand. Inmate narratives and their testimonies of torture revealed to us details of the methods and techniques used by the police,” the report stated.
The methods of torture included verbal abuse and slapping, as well as more extreme methods such as giving electric shocks, water boarding, sleep deprivation, harm to sexual parts of the body, it added.
The report further observed that “Regrettably, some of these methods (beating the soles of the feet with a baton, water boarding, hanging upside down, and rolling baton on the thighs, giving electric shocks, etc.) don’t leave visible marks on the body, which makes it difficult for victims to prove it.”
One such case of torture was reported by Jasjeet*, who is currently under trial at the Ambala central jail. During the eight days of police custody, Jasjeet was subjected to “severe forms of physical abuse, which included being given electric shocks, repeatedly being beaten with a slipper on his head, and having water forced up his nostrils”.
News18 spoke to Abhishek Jorwal, Superintendent of Police, Ambala, who outrightly denied these allegations.
“There are quarterly and monthly inspections by a High Court-appointed judge; there are visits by the Chief Judicial Magistrate as well. Before the accused is sent to judicial custody, the local police submits a report to the District Magistrate, never has any inmate told them anything. Many inmates sneak in drugs and mobile phones into the prison. They even conduct organized crime from inside the prison. They could say anything they want,” he said.
The official, who has been in charge of the Crime Investigation Agency (CIA) unit of the state police since 2017, maintained that when the police interrogates the accused they do not treat them inhumanely. “We feed them, we take their utmost care. There is no form physical violence on the accused like one sees in the movies. But, we do take the interrogation of the accused seriously.”
“Criminals know all ways to escape the scrutiny of the judicial system. So, during police remand we have to put them through tough questioning and cross questioning,” he said.
However, Justice Pramod Goyal of the HSLS, who was closely involved in the making of the report, told News18 that while the allegations of torture have surfaced, it is difficult to validate them at the present stage.
“The allegations are not made with regards to the inmate’s confinement in prison. These allegations are prior to their coming to the prison. The police may say that these findings are beyond the scope of the study. The police may not be ready to give information with regards to CIA staff,” he said.
Prison Conditions and Facilities
The CHRI study was commissioned after the Punjab and Haryana High Court constituted a committee to prepare a framework covering eight key aspects of prisons. Some aspects, which do not meet national and international standards as laid down by the 1894 Haryana Jail Manual, have been highlighted in the report.
In terms of administration and infrastructure, eight of the 19 jails have prison populations well within their official capacity. Overcrowding ranges from 170 per cent in Rewari to 22.8 per cent in Panipat.
Most jails have also given less significance to aspects like health and well-being. While all prison hospitals are equipped with medical equipment, specialised doctors such as dentists, gynecologists, dermatologist, psychiatrists and psychologists remain absent.
The practice of medical examinations at admission into the prison is followed across all prisons in the state. However, “Since only a few prisons use the National Human Rights Commission’s ‘Proforma for Health Screening of Prisoners on Admission to Jail, the inmates complained that injuries resulting from alleged torture would never be documented in the said proformas,” the report noted.
A study into the mulaaqats or visitation hours of family members in prisons revealed that some prisoners are “unable to meet their families because Aadhar cards have been made mandatory as identification proof of visitors and people without these are not allowed.”
The report further posited a list of recommendations based on the findings of the study. Justice Pramod Goyal of the HSLS told News18 that they are in the process of adopting these and an Action Taken Audit has been put in place to initiate that.
“Higher authorities will surely take cognizance of this report. We will send this report to all stakeholders including the police. It will be done within a day or two. Every stakeholder or department will look into the report as per their jurisdiction. We are proposing the audit to ensure that every stakeholder has taken note of the report, has taken action on it and whether the action taken is sufficient,” he added.
PIL – Compensate Prisoners illegally detained
An Appeal to Honourable Supreme Court of India , Karnataka High Court & National Human Rights Commission

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. OF 2017
IN THE MATTER OF

NAGARAJA . M.R
editor SOS e Clarion of Dalit & SOS e Voice for Justice
# LIG 2 , No 761 ,, HUDCO First Stage , Laxmikantanagar ,
Hebbal , Mysore – 570017 , Karnataka State
….Petitioner

Versus

Honourable Chief Secretary , Government of Karnataka & Others
….Respondents

PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 12 to ARTICLE 35 & ARTICLE 51A OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS UNDER ARTICLE 32 & ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA.

To ,
Hon’ble The Chief Justice of India and His Lordship’s Companion
Justices of the Supreme Court of India. The Humble petition of the
Petitioner above named.

MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH :

1. Facts of the case:

“Power will go to the hands of rascals, , rogues and freebooters. All Indian leaders will be of low calibre and men of straw. They will have sweet tongues and silly hearts. They will fight among themselves for
power and will be lost in political squabbles . A day would come when even air & water will be taxed.” Sir Winston made this statement in the House of Commons just before the independence of India & Pakistan. Sadly , the forewarning of Late Winston Churchill has been proved right by some of our criminal , corrupt public servants.
Majority of prisoners in Indian jails belong to poor , minority , oppressed sections of society and 2/3rd of prison population comprises of undertrials. Are not there any criminals among rich , affluent and forward castes , majority community ? It proves the bias , prejudice of police , establishment. There are good , honest people as well as criminals in all castes , religions and all walks of life. There are deadly anti nationals , criminals among the police force , judiciary , parliament , but due to their caste , financial clout escaping from conviction , legal prosecution.
As per law , all citizens of india are equal. However under trials ( who are innocents till proven guilty ) are discriminated in Indian jails. Ordinary citizens / accused are crammed in rooms resembling pig stays . whereas accused from rich / influential back grounds are given separate rooms with cot , bed , television , news paper , etc.
As per law , all citizens of india are equal. A criminal is a criminal . However Indian prison authorities discriminates here also. Former ministers who looted crores of rupees from public exchequer , corporate persons industrialists who have cheated public , public banks of crores of rupees are given royal treatment , get best food , health care where as an ordinary pick pocket , house burglar are treated like slaves , pigs don’t get proper food , health care.
India Jail Manual procedures differentiate prisoners based on their caste , social background , while allotting prison cells , food , visitor facility , parole , mandatory work , recreation facilities – which in itself is illegal.
Apart from this , corruption in Indian jails is rampant. Prisoners with money , influence get everything within jail itself , mobile phone , drugs , fire arms , etc. some mafia dons run their empire from prison itself.
Poor prisoners are tortured by police , jail personnel and criminals within jails. Indian Jails are reform centre , where everyone should treated equally in all respects. By practicing discrimination jail authorities are promoting small time criminals to commit bigger crimes to get royal treatment in society as well as in jail.
Few prisoners convicted by lower court due to bias of police , prosecutor & lower court judges are acquitted by higher courts. However due to this wrong conviction of innocents , the innocent person is deprived of his life & liberty for years , decades. But the culprits Investigating officer , police , public prosecutor & judge are not prosecuted for their crimes. In this manner even innocents are killed in fake encounters or by death sentence.
It is the duty of the judge who awards jail sentence to a convict or an accused , to ensure his safety , health care and to see that prisoner gets right punishment as per law. Here our judges have failed. SHAME SHAME to police & judges.
If the Supreme Court of India , NHRC delays in acting on this PIL petition resulting in prolonged imprisonment of undertrials , convicts or Innocents , Supreme Court of India / NHRC judges also jointly become responsible for the crimes against those illegally imprisoned and SCI judges are also equally responsible to pay compensation from their personal pockets.

2. Question(s) of Law:

Are not all prisoners equal ? is not theft of ten rupees or theft of thousand crores of rupees , both crimes ? Are not both criminals thieves ? then why differentiation ? Is it not the constitutional duty of a judge who has awarded jail sentence to an accused / a convict , to ensure safety , health care of the said prosiner ? is it not the duty of the judge to monitor whether the convict is getting right punishment as per law nothing less nothing more ?

3. Grounds:

Requests for equitable justice , equal treatment of prisoners. Requests of stopping torture of poor prisoners. Prosecution of corrupt judges , police & jail personnel.

4. Averment:
Prosecute Sanjay Dutt under TADA
https://sites.google.com/site/sosevoiceforjustice/prosecute-sanjay-dutt-under-tada ,
Revoke Bail of Salman Khan
https://sites.google.com/site/sosevoiceforjustice/revoke-bail-of-salman-khan ,

Aeroplane Rides for Corrupt Police Corrupt Judges
https://sites.google.com/site/sosevoiceforjustice/aeroplane-rides-for-corrupt-police-corrupt-judges ,

Traitors in Judiciary & Police
https://www.scribd.com/document/329980170/Traitors-in-Judiciary-Police ,

Crimes by Khaki
https://sites.google.com/site/sosevoiceforjustice/crimes-by-khaki

FIRST Answer Judges Police

Hereby , I do request the honorable supreme court of India to consider this as a PIL for : “writ of Mandamus” and to issue instructions to the concerned public servants in the cases to perform their duties.
PRAYER:
In the above premises, it is prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased:
a . Hereby , I do request the honorable supreme court of India to consider this as a PIL for : “writ of Mandamus” and to issue instructions to the concerned public servants , Government of Karnataka authorities in the case to perform their duties.

h . to pass such other orders and further orders as may be deemed necessary on the facts and in the circumstances of the case.

FOR WHICH ACT OF KINDNESS, THE PETITIONER SHALL BE DUTY BOUND, EVER PRAY.

Dated : 01st July 2017 …………………. FILED BY: NAGARAJA.M.R.

Place : Mysuru , India…………………….PETITIONER-IN-PERSON

Home page :
http://eclarionofdalit.dalitonline.in/ ,
https://dalit-online.blogspot.com/

Contact : editor@dalitonline.in , editor.dalitonline@gmail.com

Tale of 2 Judges

DALIT ONLINE – e News Weekly
Spreading the light of humanity & freedom
Editor: Nagaraja.M.R.. Vol.15..Issue.34……..25 / 08 / 2019

Tale of Two Judges
– An appeal to all SCI Judges
Read the following cases of delhi judge and CJI gogoi. Law is same for both , however note the difference in law enforcement. Note the difference in steps to find out truth, legal prosecution, enquiry. Is CJI gogoi above law , constitution of India???
A honest person doesn’t have to cover up anything, whereas a person who has committed wrong cover ups. This cover up act by gogoi itself proves he has committed wrong. Don’t be party to his cover ups and criminals yourselves.
Gold medallist did the right thing. Do we commonners have true independence as enshrined in the constitution. NO. Practically there are same laws but law enforcement will be different for different persons even for same type of crime. Biggest Criminals are within Judiciary & Police service. They are afraid even to answer following questions :

INTERROGATE Judges & Police
https://dalit-online.blogspot.com/2019/03/interrogate-judges-and-police.html

Your’s
Nagaraja Mysuru Raghupathi

Sexual Harassment of Junior by Judge

The Supreme Court, on Wednesday, dismissed a writ petition filed by a Judicial Officer of Delhi Higher Judicial Services, who is facing disciplinary proceedings alleging sexual harassment.
A Junior Judicial Assistant had filed a complaint against the judicial officer alleging sexual harassment at work place. When the matter reached the Full Court, the Judicial Officer was placed under suspension with immediate effect pending disciplinary proceeding contemplated against him. The judge approached the Apex court seeking to quash the proceedings of Internal Complaints Committee as well as Charge Sheet filed against him.
One of the contentions raised was that in view of Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, there being an Inquiry Report by Internal Complaints Committee as envisaged by Sections 11 and 13, the High Court could not have taken a decision to initiate the inquiry or to suspend the judicial officer. The issues considered by the bench comprising Justice Ashok Bhushan and Justice Navin Sinha were:
1. Whether the High Court is a disciplinary authority of the petitioner, competent to initiate the disciplinary proceedings against the petitioner and suspend him as per Delhi Higher Judicial Service Rules, 1970 and All India Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1969?
2. Whether the decision of the Full Court on 13.07.2016 initiating enquiry against the petitioner and placing him under suspension was beyond jurisdiction?
3. Whether the Preliminary Inquiry Report submitted by Internal Complaints Committee dated 05.11.2016 ought to have been supplied to the petitioner and non-supply of such Preliminary Inquiry Report dated 05.11.2016 vitiated the entire proceedings?
Answering the first two issues, the bench observed that provisions of Sections 11 and 13 in no manner affect the control of the High Court under Article 235, which it has with respect to judicial officers as noted above.
“The power to suspend the judicial officer vests in the High Court. The Full Court of the High court is in no manner precluded from initiating disciplinary inquiry against the petitioner and placing the petitioner under suspension on being satisfied that sufficient material existed. The High Court in its meeting dated 19.07.2016 has resolved to send the complaint of the employee to the Internal Complaints Committee and the Internal Complaints Committee having opined that inquiry need to be held, further steps were taken in accordance with Act, 2013.”
With regard to the third issue, the bench noted that under Section 11(1) in the second proviso, the only contemplation is to make available a copy of the findings. Thus, when the report in which there are no findings, parties are not entitled to have the copy, the bench said while dismissing the petition.

For justice’s sake, My Lord
By Urvashi Butalia
With its opaque handling of the sexual harassment case against the Chief Justice of India, the Supreme Court and its senior judges have not only failed the victim but also the larger public
As I write this, the Justice Ranjan Gogoi incident (where the Chief Justice of India was accused of sexual harassment by a junior member of his staff) has receded into the background. The media have given up reporting on it, the Committee has finished its secret work and has concluded that there was no substance in the complainant’s affidavit and things have, ostensibly, gone back to normal.
Except that they haven’t, really.
Somewhere out there is yet another woman who will carry a lifelong sense of injustice. She will join millions of others who carry a similar sense, but that fact will bring her no comfort. There will be no joy in knowing she is not alone. And we will have lost another chance to take that crucial next step towards understanding how to address this complex and confusing problem that confronts us today.
There’s no denying that the Supreme Court has long been seized of the seriousness of the issue of sexual harassment at the workplace. This is why the Court responded so positively to the Vishaka petition and acted to frame the Vishaka Guidelines many years ago. The idea was that the Guidelines would make up for the absence of a law, until such time as the government could frame the required law.
Both things happened, and neither would have happened had both actors not had the political will to make this change.
And yet, both actors, the government and the Supreme Court, reneged on their commitment to gender justice in the recent case. If one accused the complainant of cooking up a conspiracy to target the judiciary, the other supported the Supreme Court’s accusation, and this before anything had been proved. They closed ranks.
Neither thought of that crucial matter: The need for transparency in your own functioning, and scrutiny of your behaviour, especially if you are the lawmakers.
Over the years, because we are such a class- conscious society, we’ve come to accept that the police will flout the law as often as they will impose it, that lawyers too will betray their own profession. But judges? And at the Supreme Court level? Until recently, this seemed to be unthinkable.
You might say that judges, too, are fallible. Or that those who framed the Vishaka Guidelines are not the same people who occupy the Supreme Court today.
But surely this is not about individuals, it is about institutions, it is about institutional ethics and honesty, institutional accountability. If institutions fail their citizens, what then is left?
The Supreme Court and its judges in particular have earned considerable respect in recent times for often being, in increasingly difficult times, the citizen’s only recourse.
That is why it is so difficult to understand why the process was so opaque and seemingly so biased. No one knows how the judges arrived at their decision, no one knows why the complainant was not allowed to have a lawyer. No one understands why the advice of their own colleagues was not listened to.
Even if these were technicalities and the judges in question had stuck to the letter of the law, as interpreted by them, there are other issues at stake. There’s that old piece of wisdom, that justice must be done but it must also be seen to be done. This can’t happen if everything is so opaque.
Over the last few years, as a number of cases of sexual harassment at the workplace have come to the fore, and women victims have begun to speak out, the complexity of the issues we are confronted with have also come increasingly to light.
How to deal with something that happened years ago? How to deal with anonymous accusations? Whose jurisdiction is it if someone working with you is accused of sexual harassment that happened years ago? How to deal with cases that inhabit that liminal space between coercion and consent? How to deal with changing relationships? What about generational differences? How to deal with employers saying they will not employ women any more?
Everyone needs guidance in this — both guidance and understanding. We need roadmaps, we need knowledge. What we do not need is opacity. We need an understanding that the issue we are confronted with involves a hard look at power relations, at patriarchies, at human relationships and more.
This is what women’s groups drew attention to during the recent incident. Time and again they urged that the principles of justice and fairness be followed: Set up an impartial enquiry, give everyone a hearing, take evidence into account, make a judgement and be transparent. It’s only then that people will believe you. Only then the interests of justice will be served. Our Supreme Court and our senior judges — both men and women — have sadly failed us in this.
Can we be blamed for thinking they’re just protecting their own?

20 questions for SC panel that cleared CJI of sexual harassment charges: Why the bias, rush to decide and secrecy?
The Supreme Court’s special in-house committee that investigated the sexual harassment accusations against Chief Justice of India (CJI) Ranjan Gogoi has given its verdict — it found “no substance” in the allegations and has exonerated him completely. The Supreme Court’s secretary general issued a terse note on the subject that has exploded into a major controversy, with criticism mounting in mainstream and social media. There were public protests against the judgment in Delhi and Bengaluru on Tuesday, with many more cities expected to organise them in the coming days.
The committee’s judgment and the authorities’ subsequent behaviour has thrown up several troubling questions:
1. It reportedly took the committee just four sittings to arrive at a conclusion. Why was it in such a hurry to render a judgment?
2. Why did the committee not try to correct the imbalance in power between the accuser and accused in this unique case, by laying out a transparent process and providing adequate legal and other support to the complainant, or appoint an amicus curiae?

Chief Justice of India Ranjan Gogoi. News18
3. After the complainant rejected and withdrew from the committee’s proceedings, why didn’t the judges negotiate with her about her demands — all of which were anyway standard legal protocols — rather than immediately proceed without her?
4. Besides just the complainant and the CJI, did the committee speak to other pertinent witnesses like the Secretary General of the Supreme Court, or the police Station House Officer, who the complainant alleges took her to the CJI’s residence to make her apologise to the latter’s wife (the complainant says she has submitted a video recording of her interaction to the SHO)?
5. According to Hindustan Times, “the three-member committee looked only into sexual harassment allegations and did not go into the merits of the disciplinary action taken by the Supreme Court against the complainant. The woman was dismissed in December 2018 and she has claimed this was part of the harassment she faced.” If true, doesn’t this indicate a very partial investigation of the complainant’s grievances?
6. Hindustan Times reports that it has also learnt “that the panel has said in its findings that before 19 April, when she wrote to 22 judgesof the court, the complainant did not raise the allegation of sexual harassment or victimisation despite having an opportunity to do so when she challenged the disciplinary action in December 2018”. If true, doesn’t this indicate the committee’s flawed and biased approach as it tries to shame the complainant about not complaining earlier — a classic ruse to discredit sexual harassment accusers?
7. The committee has decided to keep its report secret based on a 16-year-old precedent set in the 2003 Indira Jaising versus Supreme Court of India case. Thus, the complainant herself has been denied any knowledge of the committee’s reasoning in arriving at its conclusion. Is there any way of appealing against this cover of secrecy, especially now that we have the RTI Act?
8. In her letter to the committee on 7 May, the complainant pointed out that the “Sexual Harassment of Women at the Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act 2013 in Section 13 provides that both parties have a right to receive a copy of the report”. Will the committee at least follow this basic tenet of natural justice and provide its report to both the accuser and accused instead of just one of them?
9. The committee’s report was submitted to the CJI and the next senior judge, Justice Arun Mishra. According to some media reports, Justice Mishra can decide whether to present the report to the full court, since the committee was itself set up by a full court’s approval. How can the public appeal to Justice Mishra on this front?
10. As lawyer Gautam Bhatia has argued, if the committee’s ‘informality’ insulated it from any requirement to follow existing laws on investigating sexual harassment complaints, then surely its conclusions should also be considered just as informal and disposable?
11. Can the complainant separately sue the Supreme Court as an institution for denying her the due process laid down in current law for sexual harassment complaints at the workplace as per the Prevention of Sexual Harassment Against Women at the Workplace Act and the Vishaka Guidelines (framed by the Supreme Court itself in 1997 to deal with workplace sexual harassment complaints)?
12. Do the Prevention of Sexual Harassment Against Women at the Workplace Act and the Vishaka Guidelines apply to the Supreme Court as a workplace? If not, then what law should specifically guide sexual harassment complaints from Supreme Court employees?
13. In her press release subsequent to the committee’s judgement on 6 May, the complainant stated, “I and my family members remain vulnerable to the ongoing reprisals and attack.” What can she do to protect herself from any subsequent attacks?
14. How will this affect the ongoing case of alleged fraud against the complainant (which she claims was fabricated as part of the vendetta against her), where the police is seeking cancellation of her bail?
15. The complainant’s press release on 6 May also said, “My accusation of sexual harassment at the workplace and the consequent relentless victimisation and reprisals against me and my family are substantiated by documents and are verifiable.” Will she now release these to the public?
16. On Tuesday, the police declared a curfew under Section 144 around the Supreme Court to prevent public protests against the committee’s report. The police also detained more than 50 protesters, lawyers, activists and media persons for around four hours to prevent their legal and peaceful protests. Does Indians’ constitutional right to protest not apply when it comes to the Supreme Court?
17. The media reported that the in-house committee was instituted since “no other disciplinary proceedings or procedures have been envisaged in the Constitution against sitting high court and Supreme Court judges”. And as pointed out by legal journalist Murali Krishnan, the Supreme Court has a long history of protecting judges against cases and even intimidating their accusers. Doesn’t this need to urgently change? Isn’t it time we established a clearer investigative and disciplinary mechanism against sitting judges?
18. On 19 April, the complainant couriered an account of her allegations against the CJI to all 22 SC judges in a notarised 28-page affidavit with 108 pages of annexures. A full court on the administrative side approved the in-house committee of three judges to inquire into the allegations against the CJI. And according to media reports, Justice DY Chandrachud recently wrote a letter to the three-judge committee, expressing not just his own but more than 17 Supreme Court judges’ reservations about the committee’s working, asking it not to proceed anymore with the ex parte probe. Other media reports claimed that Justice Chandrachud was speaking for himself, with the Times of Indiareporting that many brother judges were upset with him for writing such a letter. Given all this, will our Supreme Court judges finally push for an external inquiry, since only that will now restore Indians’ faith in their Supreme Court’s impartiality towards and moral authority over them?

19. Most experts seem to think that the complainants’ one clear legalrecourse left is to invoke the CJI’s impeachment, which will require a motion in Parliament sponsored by 100 Lok Sabha members or 50 Rajya Sabha members. Given that Finance Minister Arun Jaitley, and probably the BJP, has thrown his weight behind the CJI, what will the political Opposition do on this issue during election season when everyone is watching their moves?
20. If the Supreme Court doesn’t do anything more about the complainant’s allegations, how can it expect to have any moral authority in giving judgments on sexual harassment or freedom of speech?

Delhi Police Cover up Crimes by Judges

To,
Honourable Police Commissioner
New Delhi.

Honourable sir ,
Please give me information about following under RTI Act :
1. Details of action taken against SCI judges Ranjan Gogoi, swatantra kumar , Ganguly , Judges involved in roost resort sex scandal on charges of sexual harassment against women. If not reasons for it. Please give me FIR number of each case.
2. List of public servants present and past MPs , IAS & IPS officers, etc with citizenship of foreign countries in addition to indian citizenship. Also give me list of public servants with spouses of foreign origin.
3. Details of action taken against SCI judge deepak mishra in medical college case , kalikho pul death statement. President of India Pranab mukherjee was also accused by kalikho pul. If not reasons for it.
4. Details of our present MPs , IAS & IPS officers facing criminal charges .
5. Details of action taken regarding charges made by CBI director Alok verma against his deputy Rakesh Asthana and vice versa. If not reasons for it.
6. Details of action taken against police who are aiding underworld don dawood ibrahim. If not reasons for it.
7. Details of action taken against reliance industries in relation to document leak in power , petroleum , coal ministries. If not reasons for it.
8. Details of action taken against journalists, lobbyists involved in Radia tape. If not reasons for it.
9. Does Smt.Sonia Gandhi & Shri.Rahul Gandhi have citizenship of foreign countries in addition to indian citizenship. Details please.
10. Does delhi police use third degree torture against detainees.
11. Details of action taken against public servants , ministers who aided terrorism at the expense of public exchequer. If not reasons for it.

Please read documents at following web pages and answer :

https://www.scribd.com/document/402134326/INTERROGATE-Judges-Police , https://www.scribd.com/document/399783839/India-Sponsored-Terrorists , https://www.scribd.com/document/412164943/CJI-in-Jail ,

Thank you
Nagaraja Mysuru Raghupathi

Editorial : Contempt of Citizens by Judges
-Who will bell the cat ?

Our whole hearted respect to whole judiciary, honest few in judiciary, we want to state the following: Contempt of Court is used as a weapon by few judges to silence those seeking justice , equality. While handling a case one must look at the issue raised not at the social status of person raising it. Those persons may be wrong in the mode of presenting the cases , but one must look at the facts , root cause / issue. Judges & senior advocates are also human beings capable of doing exemplary deeds as well as prone to err just like others. There is a false notion that if one makes eloquent quotes , uses Latin lexicon he knows everything. Such people fail to understand and uphold basic tenets of our constitution , what is the use of their oratory ?

1.Selection of judges is not transparent. Significant number of those selected are related to seniors in one way or the other. They may be deserving but raises the question “ Are not any fit persons there in the bar who are not related to anybody but deserving ?”
2.A senior advocate by his privilege gets superfast hearing of his case at the cost of a poor litigant represented by a junior lawyer. For example a senior advocate is representing a movie producer in case related to movie screening he gets priority over a junior advocate representing a person who has suffered police torture or his land grabbing by Mafia, illegal dismissal from service ,etc. Thereby , Senior advocate & presiding judge will be violating the poor man’s right of equitable justice. Due these senior advocates in some cases poor persons represented by junior lawyer are dead by the time of judgement or suffer irreparable loss. Who will bear the cost , responsibility for this injustice senior advocate or presiding judge ?
3.In India millions of people are barely surviving on a single piece meal a day, still they pay indirect tax to public exchequer. Judges enjoy relatively huge salary , perks still judges demanded more pay & perks. Don’t they have human conscience ?
4.Corruption is rampant in judiciary just like other wings of government. This has been affirmed by former Supreme Court Judges themselves. Therefore all the judgements are not sacrosanct. Some may be and some may not be.

When issue of corruption was raised Justice Karnan was silenced by contempt of Court weapon , when disparity between senior & junior advocates was highlighted advocate M J Nedumpara was silenced by the contempt of Court weapon. When inhuman unjustified pay , perks by high court judges was questioned meghalaya journalist was Silenced by contempt of Court weapon. It clearly proves nervousness of those judges who are caught on the wrong foot. What is needed is transparency of judiciary , logically looking at the core issue raised. If the way of presenting the case is wrong punish them but only after settling core issue not by silencing the whistleblower. By silencing whistleblowers those judges are themselves making contempt of the very August office they hold , making contempt of constitution of India and contempt of citizens of India, what legal punishment for those erring judges ? Who will bell the cat ?
Edited, printed , published owned by NAGARAJA.M.R. @ # LIG-2 No 761,
HUDCO FIRST STAGE , OPP WATER WORKS , LAXMIKANTANAGAR , HEBBAL
,MYSURU – 570017 KARNATAKA INDIA Cell : 91 8970318202
WhatsApp 91 8970318202

Home page :
http://eclarionofdalit.dalitonline.in/ ,
https://dalit-online.blogspot.com/

Contact : editor@dalitonline.in , editor.dalitonline@gmail.com

Slap on CJI

DALIT ONLINE – e News Weekly
Spreading the light of humanity & freedom
Editor: Nagaraja.M.R.. Vol.15..Issue.33……..18 / 08 / 2019
Editorial : Befitting Slap on CJI’s Face

Gold medallist did the right thing. Do we commonners have true independence as enshrined in the constitution. NO. Practically there are same laws but law enforcement will be different for different persons even for same type of crime. Biggest Criminals are within Judiciary & Police service. They are afraid even to answer following questions :

INTERROGATE Judges & Police
https://dalit-online.blogspot.com/2019/03/interrogate-judges-and-police.html
CJI sex harassment case: Gold medallist skips convocation to protest clean chit

New Delhi: Delhi skipped her convocation ceremony on Saturday to protest the manner in which sexual harassment charges were handled against Chief Justice of India Ranjan Gogoi.
Her gold medal was to be awarded by the CJI himself.
Surbhi Karwa told The Indian Express: “Everything I learnt in the classroom put me in a moral quandary over the last few weeks on whether I should receive the award from CJI Gogoi. The institution he heads failed when sexual harassment allegations were made against him.”
“I am seeking answers for myself on the role lawyers must play in guarding Constitutional values, and that is something even the CJI mentioned in his speech,” she added.
On Saturday when her name was announced by Registrar Prof (Dr) G S Bajpai, he said: “Unfortunately, she is not here. We will award her the medal in absentia.”
For her Master’s degree, Karwa specialised in Constitutional law. Her thesis was a feminist critique of the Constituent Assembly debates. It revolved around the central question — Is the Constitution a feminist document?
Karwa made it clear she has just refused to attend the convocation and not denied the award.
“Getting the gold medal is an honour and I am thankful to my parents and teachers who have helped me along the way. Receiving it from one person is not as important as getting it,” Karwa said.
Apart from CJI Gogoi, Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal and Deputy Chief Minister Manish Sisodia were among those present as chief guests in the event.
In April, a former employee of the apex court accused Chief Justice of India Ranjan Gogoi of sexual harassment and subsequent persecution after she resisted his alleged sexual advances.
She sent a 29-page affidavit to all judges of the Supreme Court and demanded an inquiry into the actions of Gogoi.
Justice Gogoi rubbished the allegations as “unbelievable” and hinted that there may have been a “bigger force behind this” that wanted to “deactivate the office of CJI.”
However, the Supreme Court appointed in-house committee cleared him of charges, finding “no substance”.
The complainant had withdrawn from the proceedings on being denied a lawyer.

Delhi Police Cover up Crimes by Judges

To,
Honourable Police Commissioner
New Delhi.

Please read documents at following web pages and answer :

https://www.scribd.com/document/402134326/INTERROGATE-Judges-Police , https://www.scribd.com/document/399783839/India-Sponsored-Terrorists , https://www.scribd.com/document/412164943/CJI-in-Jail ,

Thank you
Nagaraja Mysuru Raghupathi

Editorial : Contempt of Citizens by Judges
-Who will bell the cat ?

Why The kith And Kin Of Judges Being Mostly Considered For Appointments? Asks SCBA President
CJI Khehar also denies his son is on any state government panel

The Independence Day ceremony at the Supreme Court lawns 0n 15.08.2018 became a venue of some “polite” exchange between Supreme Court Bar Association President R S Suri and Chief Justice J S Khehar regarding children of judges or retired judges becoming judges and “80% of government panels being filled with sons and daughters of judges.
It all started when SCBA President Suri in his speech while reminding Law Minister Ravi Shankar Prasad and Chief Justice J S Khehar who were on the dais “several matters of concern” said “then there is one issue again an empirical..that why most of the judges who become HC judges are sons of previous judges. Why is that 80% of panels are filled with sons and daughters of the judges? These things are there but some empirical but some logical things have to be there so that we give some chance for other people also to come up the ladder because they are able and capable”
“Why is that the kith and kin of judges have the panels and are being considered for appointment as judges. Time has come that judiciary takes itself a ‘Sankalp Parva’ to clean the system of the 3rd wing, which is the most important
one in upholding the constitutional values”, he said.

PIL – Indian Judge’s Sex & Crimes

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA ORIGINAL JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. OF 2019
IN THE MATTER OF

NAGARAJA . M.R
editor DALIT ONLINE ,
# LIG 2 , No 761 ,, HUDCO First Stage , Laxmikantanagar ,
Hebbal , Mysore – 570017 , Karnataka State
.
….Petitioner

Versus
Honourable Chief Justice of India & Others

….Respondents
PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 12 to ARTICLE 35 & ARTICLE 51A OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS UNDER ARTICLE 32 & ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA.

To ,
All Honourable Judges ,
Supreme Court of India ,
New Delhi.
The Humble petition of the Petitioner above named.

MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH :
1. Facts of the case:
“Power will go to the hands of rascals, , rogues and freebooters. All Indian leaders will be of low calibre and men of straw. They will have sweet tongues and silly hearts. They will fight among themselves for
power and will be lost in political squabbles . A day would come when even air & water will be taxed.” Sir Winston made this statement in the House of Commons just before the independence of India & Pakistan. Sadly , the forewarning of Late Winston Churchill has been proved right by some of our criminal , corrupt public servants.
2. Since past several years women have complained about immoral, illegal acts by judges against women.
3. In the recent case Honourable CJI Ranjan Gogoi himself is accused of forceful sexual advance against a court employee. He is also accused of victimising the family of women for not consenting to his sexual advance.
4. The victimisation of women’s family itself points to cover up of a crime.
5. Honourable CJI also made allegations of criminal conspiracy to undermine judiciary.
6. Few advocates have appealed to court , to issue gag order to media from publishing this issue in the interest of preserving respect of judiciary.
7. In the past too when allegations about sex crimes by judges were made transparent impartial investigations were not done.
2. Question(s) of Law:
Are judges above law ?
Why not same mode of enquiry, investigation, prosecution of accused judges in the same manner a common man accused of same crime faces ?
Is it right to divert attention to another crime to cover up a primary crime ?
Will judiciary get whole hearted respect from public by threatening them with gag orders or contempt charges ?
doesn’t public have the right to discuss about a crime and accountability of judges ?

3. Grounds:
Requests for equitable justice , Accountability of judges.

4. Averment:
Before law common man , minister , beggar , judge are all equal and must be treated as equals.
Respect for judiciary has been eroded by improper actions of few unfit judges not from media or the public. If judges respect law in letter & spirit by their actions then automatically public will respect judiciary. By fear of punishment respect cannot be expected.
Before gagging public , media SCI must gag CJI & Others from making uncalled for comments against woman complainant & her family.
Hereby , I do request the honorable supreme court of India to consider this as a PIL for : “writ of Mandamus” and to issue instructions to the concerned public servants in the following cases to perform their duties.
PRAYER:
In the above premises, it is prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased:
(i) Hereby , I do request the honorable supreme court of India to consider this as a PIL for : “writ of Mandamus” and to issue instructions to the concerned public servants in the following cases to perform their duties.
(ii) to pass such other orders and further orders as may be deemed necessary on the facts and in the circumstances of the case.
3. To provide protection to family of woman complainant.
4. To institute a transparent impartial investigations into present sex case involving CJI and below mentioned old sex cases involving judges.
5. To legally prosecute & punish public servants who victimised woman complainant and her family.
6. To constitute separate investigation into allegations made by CJI.
7. Both investigations should not influence each other. Then alone truth will come out, Respect for Judiciary will be restored.
8. Don’t treat accused judges with kid gloves , treat them on par with common accused.

FOR WHICH ACT OF KINDNESS, THE PETITIONER SHALL BE DUTY BOUND, EVER PRAY.

Dated : 28th April 2019……………………………………….. FILED BY: NAGARAJA.M.R.

Place : Mysuru , India………………………….. PETITIONER-IN-PERSON
Editorial : Hang Rapist Judges to lamp Posts – JUDGES & SEXUAL CRIMES
– Honourable CJI Ranjan Gogoi face enquiry

When a common man is accused of a crime , he has to face the heat. Ultimately at the end of crime
– At the outset , we express our whole hearted respects to the honest few public servants
in public service including judiciary & Police. However, the corrupt in public service don’t deserve
respect as individuals – as they are parasites in our legal system. Still we respect the
chairs they occupy but not the corrupt individuals.
All the following articles / issues , past cases of sexual assaults on women by judges (hushed up ?) , whole articles published in the weblinks mentioned
below forms part of this appeal. The term “JUDGE” mentioned throught includes all public
servants discharging judicial functions right from taluk magistrates , quasi-judicial
officers to Chief Justice of India.
Indian Legal / Judicial System is manipulated at various stages & is for sale. It is a SHAME.
The persons who raise their voice seeking justice are silenced in many ways. The
criminal nexus has already attempted to silence me in many ways . If anything untoward
happens to me or to my family members , my dependents , Honourable Chief Justice of
India together with jurisdictional police officer will be responsible for it.
Hereby, we do once again offer our conditional services to the honourable supreme court
of India & other government authorities, in apprehending criminals including corrupt
judges & police. Herewith , we once again appeal to the honourable supreme court of
India , to consider this as a PIL Appeal in public interest.
Consider the cases of sexual assault by JUDGES , POLICE on women . The JUDGES
have legal immunity with respect to their official duties, official actions but not their
individual actions amounting to CRIMES.
The public servants & the government must be role models in law abiding acts , for others
to emulate & follow. if a student makes a mistake it is excusable & can be corrected by
the teacher. if the teacher himself makes a mistake , all his students will do the same
mistake. if a thief steals , he can be caught , legally punished & reformed . if a police
himself commits crime , many thieves go scot- free under his patronage. even if a police ,
public servant commits a crime , he can be legally prosecuted & justice can be sought by
the aggrieved. just think , if a judge himself that too of apex court of the land itself
commits crime – violations of RTI Act , constitutional rights & human rights of public and
obstructs the public from performing their constitutional fundamental duties , what
happens ? it gives a booster dose to the rich & mighty , those in power , criminals in
public service to committ more crimes. that is exactly what is happenning in india. the
educated public must raise to the occassion & peacefully , democratically must oppose
this criminalisation of judiciary , public service. then alone , we can build a RAM RAJYA OF MAHATMA GANDHI’S DREAM.

Hereby , we request the honourable court to reopen all hushed up old cases of sexual assault involving judges and to punish the guilty judges.
Women Lawyers Question Chief Justice Gogoi’s Handling of Sexual Harassment Charge
By wire

If in the face of the complaint, a person can expect to be publicly vilified, deemed to be “wild and scandalous” even before any enquiry, and has to face the entire collective might of the judiciary, how do we ever claim to offer constitutional justice to women who experience sexual harassment?
14′
Credit: PTI/Illustration by The Wire

LAW

Women Lawyers Question Chief Justice Gogoi’s Handling of Sexual Harassment Charge
If in the face of the complaint, a person can expect to be publicly vilified, deemed to be “wild and scandalous” even before any enquiry, and has to face the entire collective might of the judiciary, how do we ever claim to offer constitutional justice to women who experience sexual harassment?
On Saturday evening, the Women in Criminal Law Association, a recently established collaborative group for women in criminal litigation, issued a statement on Chief Justice of India Ranjan Gogoi’s handling of a sexual harassment charge levelled against him by a former junior court assistant. The statement raises a number of questions about the convening of a special bench on Saturday morning and the manner in which it conducted its deliberations and passed an order.
14′
Credit: PTI/Illustration by The Wire

LAW

The Wire Staff

LAW

WOMEN
12 HOURS AGO
On Saturday evening, the Women in Criminal Law Association, a recently established collaborative group for women in criminal litigation, issued a statement on Chief Justice of India Ranjan Gogoi’s handling of a sexual harassment charge levelled against him by a former junior court assistant. The statement raises a number of questions about the convening of a special bench on Saturday morning and the manner in which it conducted its deliberations and passed an order.
The statement is published in full below.
§
A complaint of sexual harassment against the sitting Chief Justice of India was sent (along with an affidavit and other supporting evidence) to the other sitting judges of the Supreme Court of India asking for the constitution of an inquiry committee of senior retired judges to investigate and adjudicate these serious allegations.
The legal institutional response to such a complaint as mandated under the “In-House Procedure” applicable to Judges of the Supreme Court and the High Court, along with the Sexual Harassment of Women at the Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal Act) Act, (“POSH Act”) read with the Supreme Court Sexual Harassment Regulations, 2013, is for the designated inquiry committee to take cognizance of the complaint, constitute an inquiry committee and give notice to the respondent as to the initiation of such proceedings.
Today, in an unprecedented move beyond the scope of any known procedure or principle of law – whether under the “in house procedure” or in the POSH Act or the Supreme Court Sexual Harassment Regulations – a notice was issued on the Supreme Court website that a ‘special bench’ was being constituted to hold court at 10:30 am on the mentioning by the solicitor general, even as the court has been on vacation since Wednesday and is scheduled to reopen only on Monday.
The notice states that the purpose of the hearing is “to deal with a matter of great public importance touching upon the independence of the judiciary.”
The notice for the hearing
The bench comprised three judges of the Supreme Court including the respondent himself:
1.Why was the respondent himself sitting in judgment over his own case?
That no man shall be a judge in his own cause is one of the most sacrosanct principles of natural justice that the court routinely preaches and enforces in the hundreds of cases it adjudicates every day. The Chief Justice as master of the roster has the sole authority to constitute the Bench. Did he not think it fit to exclude himself from its composition.
2. Why were no women justices on this Special Bench?
Justice Indu Malhotra is the chairperson of the Internal Complaints Committee of the Supreme Court and was not included in this special bench. None of the other women justices of the Supreme Court were included either. Given that the POSH Act is crystal clear that the committee inquiring into sexual harassment must be headed by a woman and must comprise of a majority of women, why was this principle not followed when constituting a special bench to respond to the complaint?
3. What was the purpose of this hearing?
If the special bench was not assembling to deal with the complaint (and hence not following the “In House Procedure”/POSH Act/ Sexual Harassment Regulations) then what was the purpose of convening a special bench of the court? Given that the inquiry is meant to take place behind closed doors while following a prescribed procedure, could these allegations ever be adjudicated in open court?
4. Can this matter be taken up on the judicial side?
There is a special “in-house procedure” governing inquiry into allegations against sitting Judges of the Supreme Court and the High Court. While the said in-house procedure does not envisage a mechanism to be adopted in the event a complaint is received against the Chief Justice of India themselves, it is pertinent to highlight the procedure laid out otherwise. Upon receiving a complaint against a judge of the Supreme Court, the CJI shall examine it first, and if it is of a serious nature involving misconduct or impropriety, they shall ask for a response from the concerned judge. Upon receiving his response, if the CJI is of the opinion that the matter needs a deeper probe, he would constitute a committee consisting of three judges of the Supreme Court, which shall then conduct an inquiry into the said Complaint. As such, because the “in house procedure” prescribes no mechanism for complaints against the CJI, it is clear that a person aggrieved by the acts of the CJI, as well as the inquiry that will follow, will be guided by the procedure as laid down for other judges in the “in house procedure”, which mandates the constitution of a committee. The Supreme Court Sexual Harassment Regulations, 2013 also has a specific procedure to be followed in the event of a complaint and do not envisage any open court hearing on the judicial side as a procedure for responding to a complaint.
The hearing
At this hearing, as reported on Twitter by legal news websites, the respondent claimed that the complaint is a part of a plot to attack the independence of the judiciary. The complainant was stated to have criminal antecedents and the allegations were stated to be not worthy of any response. Several serious questions arise:
1. Why was the respondent, while he was sitting in his official capacity as the Chief Justice of India as a presiding officer of a special bench responding to personal allegations against him?
2. Why did the respondent make personal statements about his bank balance and reputation during a court hearing, where he was speaking as the Chief Justice of India (and not a press conference, where he could have spoken in his personal capacity)? Furthermore, what was the relevance of these statements, apart from prejudicing the case of the complainant by appealing to irrelevant facts to create sympathy?
3. What fair process allows the case of the complainant to be prejudiced even before the start of any inquiry by allowing the respondent himself, in his official capacity and from his position of power, to declare mala fides against the complaint to the public at large?
4. What due process allows a public hearing in a court of law without the presence and participation of a representative of the complainant while statements about the merits of her case and her bona fides are pronounced upon?
5. Why did none of the officers of the court (AG/SG) or the officer bearers of the Supreme Court Bar Association who were present highlight to the special bench the in-house procedure or the Supreme Court Sexual Harassment Regulations, 2013? While the AG was quick to point at confidentiality obligations upon participants in an inquiry under the POSH Act (which has not even begun at this stage) and therefore decry the public naming of the Chief Justice as the respondent in the complaint, the actual process under the Act to deal with the complaint was not deemed to be important enough to mention.
6. What was the role of the attorney general and solicitor general? As per reports, the matter was ‘mentioned’ by the solicitor general. ‘Mentioning’ is a procedure used for urgent listing of cases, which incidentally the current CJI has repeatedly discouraged and criticised. Clearly, there was no matter to be listed on an urgent basis and certainly no matter concerning the Government of India (since the attorney general and solicitor general are law officers of the Government of India). Additionally, the order passed by the Court shows the case as a ‘Suo-Motu Writ Petition (Civil) under the court’s inherent jurisdiction’. This indicates that the judges instituted this writ petition themselves, which is contrary to the reports that it was mentioned by the solicitor general. Why did the AG and SG, immediately align themselves with the respondent-CJI (as may be gleaned from the records of the proceedings that are available on social media)? This immediate unwavering support for the respondent expressed by the president of the Supreme Court Bar Association without there having been any form of inquiry sends out a clear signal: that there is no space for a woman, especially a woman lawyer, to come out with her experiences of sexual harassment without having the doyens of the legal fraternity immediately turning upon her.
Judicial independence
The serious question of judicial independence was raised both as the alleged purpose for conveying a hearing by a special bench as well as at the hearing itself with no less than the respondent himself stating this the complaint is only a plot to attack the credibility and independence of the judiciary.
However, the idea behind an in-house procedure, adopted by a full court meeting (all the judges) of the Supreme Court on 15.12.1999, was to safeguard the independence of the judiciary since the complaint would be examined by the peers of the respondent judge; and also “preserve the faith of the people in the independence and impartiality of the judicial process” since it would demonstrate that there exists a machinery for the examination of complaints against a judge, and that members of the higher judiciary are also accountable for their conduct.
Therefore, convening a special bench in order to allege an attack on the independence of the judiciary, instead of following due process and adopting the in-house procedure is not only ironic, but also raises important questions about fair procedure:
1. Why are specific allegations against a specific individual justice of the court necessarily conflated with attacks against the institution?
Judicial independence cannot mean that no complaints of misconduct can ever be made against a specific individual justice of the court. In fact, the Supreme Court has itself in the past experienced and adjudicated upon instances and allegations of sexual harassment by sitting/retired judges, without ever branding it as an attack on judicial independence. In the instance of one particular retired judge, the Supreme Court fact-finding committee found that the allegations of sexual harassment, were prima facie made out. The #MeToo movement showed us how powerful men hide behind the safety of their institutions when faced with allegations of sexual harassment. But that the highest court of justice of the country would allow that is a smite on the constitutional promise of dignity, equality and due process of law.
2. Independence from what?
The history of the phrase ‘independence of the judiciary’ evolved as a safeguard against undue interference by the executive. It appears that in the present moment, the executive and judicial wings are completely in tandem with their mutual contempt for complainants and due process to be followed when adjudicating complaints of sexual harassment. The matter of great public importance appears less to be about judicial independence and more about the now established fact that the legal profession operates as a men’s club where any woman who speaks up will be collectively shamed and sullied without any expectation of constitutional justice.
3. Does judicial independence mean an embargo on sexual harassment complaints against judges?
Judicial independence does not and cannot mean ‘independence’ from any inquiry when serious allegations such as those outlined in the present complaint are made against a specific judicial officer. None of the highest ranking judicial and legal officers of this country have explained which institution/person/external influence they foresee this threat from. The manner of handling the complaint against the CJI by the Supreme Court today also raises an important question: having adjudicated upon cases of sexual harassment by Judges and other matters of judicial impropriety in the past without it becoming an issue about the judicial system as a whole, what was the need to adopt an unprecedented method of convening a Special Bench to address a personal allegation against the CJI (without committing to the adherence to due procedure in its adjudication)
The order
At the end of the hearing, the Special Bench passed an order observing as follows:
“Having considered the matter, we refrain from passing any judicial order at this moment leaving it to the wisdom of the media to show restraint, act responsibly as is expected from them and accordingly decide what should or should not be published as wild and scandalous allegations undermine and irreparably damage reputation and negate the independence of the judiciary. We would therefore at this juncture leave it to the media to take off such material which is undesirable.”
This raises further questions:
1. Why did the coram in this judicial order not include all three presiding members?
14′
Credit: PTI/Illustration by The Wire

LAW

The Wire Staff

LAW

The notice states that the purpose of the hearing is “to deal with a matter of great public importance touching upon the independence of the judiciary.”
The notice for the hearing
The bench comprised three judges of the Supreme Court including the respondent himself:
1.Why was the respondent himself sitting in judgment over his own case?
That no man shall be a judge in his own cause is one of the most sacrosanct principles of natural justice that the court routinely preaches and enforces in the hundreds of cases it adjudicates every day. The Chief Justice as master of the roster has the sole authority to constitute the Bench. Did he not think it fit to exclude himself from its composition.
2. Why were no women justices on this Special Bench?
Justice Indu Malhotra is the chairperson of the Internal Complaints Committee of the Supreme Court and was not included in this special bench. None of the other women justices of the Supreme Court were included either. Given that the POSH Act is crystal clear that the committee inquiring into sexual harassment must be headed by a woman and must comprise of a majority of women, why was this principle not followed when constituting a special bench to respond to the complaint?
3. What was the purpose of this hearing?
If the special bench was not assembling to deal with the complaint (and hence not following the “In House Procedure”/POSH Act/ Sexual Harassment Regulations) then what was the purpose of convening a special bench of the court? Given that the inquiry is meant to take place behind closed doors while following a prescribed procedure, could these allegations ever be adjudicated in open court?
4. Can this matter be taken up on the judicial side?
There is a special “in-house procedure” governing inquiry into allegations against sitting Judges of the Supreme Court and the High Court. While the said in-house procedure does not envisage a mechanism to be adopted in the event a complaint is received against the Chief Justice of India themselves, it is pertinent to highlight the procedure laid out otherwise. Upon receiving a complaint against a judge of the Supreme Court, the CJI shall examine it first, and if it is of a serious nature involving misconduct or impropriety, they shall ask for a response from the concerned judge. Upon receiving his response, if the CJI is of the opinion that the matter needs a deeper probe, he would constitute a committee consisting of three judges of the Supreme Court, which shall then conduct an inquiry into the said Complaint. As such, because the “in house procedure” prescribes no mechanism for complaints against the CJI, it is clear that a person aggrieved by the acts of the CJI, as well as the inquiry that will follow, will be guided by the procedure as laid down for other judges in the “in house procedure”, which mandates the constitution of a committee. The Supreme Court Sexual Harassment Regulations, 2013 also has a specific procedure to be followed in the event of a complaint and do not envisage any open court hearing on the judicial side as a procedure for responding to a complaint.
The hearing
At this hearing, as reported on Twitter by legal news websites, the respondent claimed that the complaint is a part of a plot to attack the independence of the judiciary. The complainant was stated to have criminal antecedents and the allegations were stated to be not worthy of any response. Several serious questions arise:
1. Why was the respondent, while he was sitting in his official capacity as the Chief Justice of India as a presiding officer of a special bench responding to personal allegations against him?
2. Why did the respondent make personal statements about his bank balance and reputation during a court hearing, where he was speaking as the Chief Justice of India (and not a press conference, where he could have spoken in his personal capacity)? Furthermore, what was the relevance of these statements, apart from prejudicing the case of the complainant by appealing to irrelevant facts to create sympathy?
3. What fair process allows the case of the complainant to be prejudiced even before the start of any inquiry by allowing the respondent himself, in his official capacity and from his position of power, to declare mala fides against the complaint to the public at large?
4. What due process allows a public hearing in a court of law without the presence and participation of a representative of the complainant while statements about the merits of her case and her bona fides are pronounced upon?
5. Why did none of the officers of the court (AG/SG) or the officer bearers of the Supreme Court Bar Association who were present highlight to the special bench the in-house procedure or the Supreme Court Sexual Harassment Regulations, 2013? While the AG was quick to point at confidentiality obligations upon participants in an inquiry under the POSH Act (which has not even begun at this stage) and therefore decry the public naming of the Chief Justice as the respondent in the complaint, the actual process under the Act to deal with the complaint was not deemed to be important enough to mention.
6. What was the role of the attorney general and solicitor general? As per reports, the matter was ‘mentioned’ by the solicitor general. ‘Mentioning’ is a procedure used for urgent listing of cases, which incidentally the current CJI has repeatedly discouraged and criticised. Clearly, there was no matter to be listed on an urgent basis and certainly no matter concerning the Government of India (since the attorney general and solicitor general are law officers of the Government of India). Additionally, the order passed by the Court shows the case as a ‘Suo-Motu Writ Petition (Civil) under the court’s inherent jurisdiction’. This indicates that the judges instituted this writ petition themselves, which is contrary to the reports that it was mentioned by the solicitor general. Why did the AG and SG, immediately align themselves with the respondent-CJI (as may be gleaned from the records of the proceedings that are available on social media)? This immediate unwavering support for the respondent expressed by the president of the Supreme Court Bar Association without there having been any form of inquiry sends out a clear signal: that there is no space for a woman, especially a woman lawyer, to come out with her experiences of sexual harassment without having the doyens of the legal fraternity immediately turning upon her.
Judicial independence
The serious question of judicial independence was raised both as the alleged purpose for conveying a hearing by a special bench as well as at the hearing itself with no less than the respondent himself stating this the complaint is only a plot to attack the credibility and independence of the judiciary.
However, the idea behind an in-house procedure, adopted by a full court meeting (all the judges) of the Supreme Court on 15.12.1999, was to safeguard the independence of the judiciary since the complaint would be examined by the peers of the respondent judge; and also “preserve the faith of the people in the independence and impartiality of the judicial process” since it would demonstrate that there exists a machinery for the examination of complaints against a judge, and that members of the higher judiciary are also accountable for their conduct.
Therefore, convening a special bench in order to allege an attack on the independence of the judiciary, instead of following due process and adopting the in-house procedure is not only ironic, but also raises important questions about fair procedure:
1. Why are specific allegations against a specific individual justice of the court necessarily conflated with attacks against the institution?
Judicial independence cannot mean that no complaints of misconduct can ever be made against a specific individual justice of the court. In fact, the Supreme Court has itself in the past experienced and adjudicated upon instances and allegations of sexual harassment by sitting/retired judges, without ever branding it as an attack on judicial independence. In the instance of one particular retired judge, the Supreme Court fact-finding committee found that the allegations of sexual harassment, were prima facie made out. The #MeToo movement showed us how powerful men hide behind the safety of their institutions when faced with allegations of sexual harassment. But that the highest court of justice of the country would allow that is a smite on the constitutional promise of dignity, equality and due process of law.
2. Independence from what?
The history of the phrase ‘independence of the judiciary’ evolved as a safeguard against undue interference by the executive. It appears that in the present moment, the executive and judicial wings are completely in tandem with their mutual contempt for complainants and due process to be followed when adjudicating complaints of sexual harassment. The matter of great public importance appears less to be about judicial independence and more about the now established fact that the legal profession operates as a men’s club where any woman who speaks up will be collectively shamed and sullied without any expectation of constitutional justice.
3. Does judicial independence mean an embargo on sexual harassment complaints against judges?
Judicial independence does not and cannot mean ‘independence’ from any inquiry when serious allegations such as those outlined in the present complaint are made against a specific judicial officer. None of the highest ranking judicial and legal officers of this country have explained which institution/person/external influence they foresee this threat from. The manner of handling the complaint against the CJI by the Supreme Court today also raises an important question: having adjudicated upon cases of sexual harassment by Judges and other matters of judicial impropriety in the past without it becoming an issue about the judicial system as a whole, what was the need to adopt an unprecedented method of convening a Special Bench to address a personal allegation against the CJI (without committing to the adherence to due procedure in its adjudication)
The order
At the end of the hearing, the Special Bench passed an order observing as follows:
“Having considered the matter, we refrain from passing any judicial order at this moment leaving it to the wisdom of the media to show restraint, act responsibly as is expected from them and accordingly decide what should or should not be published as wild and scandalous allegations undermine and irreparably damage reputation and negate the independence of the judiciary. We would therefore at this juncture leave it to the media to take off such material which is undesirable.”
This raises further questions:
1. Why did the coram in this judicial order not include all three presiding members?
The order passed today shockingly did not contain the name of the CJI in the coram. The reporting on the hearing is silent as to whether the Chief Justice recused himself at the hearing. If he did, why did he make such extensive comments at the hearing? If he intended to recuse himself, why did the master of the roster convene a special bench that included himself? If he recused himself, why has the special bench passed any speaking order or conducted any hearing at all when the regular procedure is to pass an order for the matter to be listed before another bench in the face of the recusal? Why does the order nowhere reflect the fact that the Chief Justice was present on the special bench and made several statements from the bench? It is a matter of practice and propriety that the judicial record should contain an accurate record of the proceedings before the court.
2. Why are these “wild and scandalous allegations”?
A bare reading of the complaint and the news reporting on it shows that the Complainant has given a detailed account of each incident that took place, and has produced evidence in support of her claims. While Judges of the Supreme Court may consider allegations of sexual harassment against them ‘wild’ or scandalous’, as young women from the profession, these allegations seem all too relatable. There have been several instances of former interns of Supreme Court judges (and lawyers) raising allegations of predatory behaviour by them, and a reading of those accounts along with personal experiences shows that the signs of predatory behaviour are disturbingly similar.
3. Can the judiciary communicate to the media via a judicial hearing?
The respondent himself was a part of the four judges who held a historic press conference that addressed the public on issues of grave importance in relation to judicial independence. The allegations are not against the office of the Chief Justice. They are against the individual as a judicial officer. It was completely wrong for the individual to respond to these allegations and effectively communicate to the media from the Bench.
4. Chilling Effect: Under what power/authority are judges in a ‘non-judicial order’ directing for restraint in media reporting?
It is also relevant to be noted that such a ‘communication’ from the Apex court in the country has a chilling effect on the media and this will in all practicality act as a restraint on the media from reporting news related to the issue.
This leaves us with a final question:
What justice for aggrieved persons?
If in the face of the complaint, a person can expect to be publicly vilified, deemed to be “wild and scandalous” even before any enquiry, and has to face the entire collective might of the judiciary as an institution, the officers of the Government of India and the Bar Council of India, how do we ever claim to offer constitutional justice to women who experience sexual harassment?

Panel names former India Supreme Court judge Ganguly in sex harassment allegation

Shocked, shattered by allegations: former Supreme Court judge Ganguly
New Delhi: A three-member panel that probed the charge of sexual harassment of a young lawyer by a Supreme Court judge has submitted its report, identifying the judge as A K Ganguly, court sources said on Friday.
The report was submitted on Thursday after the committee of three judges met six times. This is the first time an alleged perpetrator has been named.
The report, submitted to Chief Justice P Sathasivam, also carries the statements of the victim, who interned in the Supreme Court, and that of the now-retired Justice Ganguly, the sources said.
The graduate of Kolkata-based National University of Judicial Sciences (NUJS) had alleged sexual harassment by Ganguly while interning for him in December 2012.
The committee, which held six sittings on November 13, 19, 21, 26, and 27, submitted its report to Chief Justice Sathasivam on November 28.
The victim appeared before the committee on November 19 and was expected to appear again on November 21 but chose to stay away.
She first mentioned the incident in a blog for Journal of Indian Law and Society on November 6 and later told the same in an interview with Legally India website.
The victim, who is working with Natural Justice: Lawyers for Communities and Environment, said she heard that there were three other girls besides her who were sexually harassed by the same judge.
She also claimed to have knowledge of four more girls who were allegedly harassed by other judges in their chambers.
Denying any sexual harassment, Ganguly on Friday said he was “shocked and shattered” by the charges against him.
“I am denying everything. I have told the committee that all the allegations levelled by the intern are wrong. I don’t know how such allegations have been levelled against me,” he said.
“I am a victim of situations,” he told television channels.
“I am not ashamed of anything,” he said in reply to a question regarding the alleged episode which came out in public after the victim spoke about it in the legal portal earlier this month.
He said the charges against him were totally wrong. The girl had not raised any sexual harassment issue with him, he said, adding that he had not done any physical harm to her.
The former judge said the intern worked with him though she was not officially allocated to him. She came in the place of another intern who had gone abroad after marriage. “I never put up a poster. She came on her own.”
He said the girl had come to his house on a number of occasions in connection with work.

sexual harassment: Intern moves SC for inquiry against Justice Swatanter Kumar
New Delhi: A former law intern, who has made sexual harassment allegations against Justice Swatanter Kumar, today moved the Supreme Court seeking inquiry against the retired judge.
A bench headed by Chief Justice P Sathasivam, before whom the matter was mentioned for urgent hearing, agreed to take up the case on January 15.
The intern, in the petition, challenged the apex court’s December 5, 2013 full court resolution in which it was decided that no complaint against its retired judges will be entertained.

The petitioner also submitted that a proper forum be constituted to conduct inquiry in such cases and her complaint be also looked into by the apex court like it was done in the case of sexual harassment allegations against Justice (retd) A K Ganguly.
The intern has made Justice Kumar, Secretary General of the Supreme Court and Union of India parties in the case.
She submitted that Justice Kumar was a sitting judge at the time of the alleged incident and the apex court must look into the complaint as per Vishaka guidelines.
Justice Kumar, who is currently heading the National Green Tribunal, has described the allegations as “incredulous and false” and “some kind of conspiracy”.

IB confirms Mysore Roost Resort sex scandal

The Intelligence Bureau has provided the Centre with a detailed account of the escapade
involving three Karnataka High Court judges on November 3 in a resort on the outskirts of
Mysore, highly placed sources told The Times of India on Friday.
According to a senior official, “Most of the information sought has not only confirmed the veracity
of the incident but the government has crosschecked it with another police agency. Both the
reports match.”
The incident was widely reported in the media. What has surprised the Centre is the “dogged
refusal” of the Karnataka police to confirm the incident. “Mysore Police Commissioner C.
Chandrasekhar first denied that the incident ever took place. Only when a public notice was
issued through the high court registrar seeking information on the Mysore scandal, did the facts
come out in the open. Public protest helped a lot,” says the source.
What transpired at the resort, says the source, “cannot be expected from anyone in civil society,
leave alone persons sworn to upholding the law”. According to him, “The IB report consists of
unmentionable facts and also makes it amply clear that the Mysore incident is not the first time
such things have happened. Can anyone expect upholders of the law to pick a fight with people
who complained to the police when caught in a compromising position?”
In a related development, Karnataka High Court Chief Justice N.K. Jain has written to Chief
Justice of India Justice G.B. Pattanaik asking that three judges be transferred. Jain has proposed
that Justice N.S. Veerabhadraiah be transferred to the Patna High Court, Justice
Chandrasekharaiah to Jammu & Kashmir and Justice V. Gopala Gowda to the Gauhati High
Court.
While Jain is understood not to have given any reasons, highly placed sources say the proposal
for transfers is linked to the Mysore incident.
However, the source says that now the government is worried about the appropriate “remedial
measures”. In such cases, transferring a judge to a remote high court doesn’t always work. He
says, “Bar associations and the people of northeastern states were up in arms when some
judges of the Punjab and Haryana high courts were transferred there. We expect similar protests
if the CJI accepts Justice Jain’s proposal to transfer the three judges of the Karnataka High
Court.”
The Bar Council of India on Friday, while expressing its anguish at the Karnataka incident, called
for “follow-up action”.
“Unless prompt and appropriate action is taken, it will erode the faith of public in the only
institution considered to be the bastion of our fighting faith in democracy,” it said in a statement.
The BCI has “lamented” inaction in this case by “the higher judiciary and the government”.

Read more: IB confirms Mysore sex scandal – The Times of India http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/bangalore/IB-confirms-Mysore-sexscandal/articleshow/29801662.cms#ixzz1B7PtvFdU ,
Nothing but the truth
By Indira Jaising

A midst the rising din of the demand for death penalty for rapists comes the news that three judges of the Karnataka High Court have been involved in what has come to be described as a ‘sex scandal’ on the outskirts of Mysore at a place called Roost Resorts.
Our attention is now directed to those who dispense justice rather than those who knock at the doors of justice. In both cases, we are talking about the use and abuse of women — those who are victims of sexual abuse, and those who are used as sexual objects, willingly or unwillingly.
After the reports in local newspapers that three high court judges were found with women at a resort, there was the usual crop of denials. Although the Mysore police were called in to settle a brawl, on being told that the persons in question were judges they said that they heard no evil and saw no evil.
And everyone thought the matter ended there.
Attempts to get the names of the judges or of the women in question drew a blank. The bar association also drew a blank as most people said, “Don’t quote me… but…”
On November 30, the Bangalore edition of The Times of India published a front-page story giving the names and photographs of the three judges and confirming that the Intelligence Bureau had done an investigation and come to the conclusion that the incident had indeed occurred. There were still no details of the incident, though it was stated that the report has been given to the chief justice of India.
There were reports on the same day that the Karnataka High Court chief justice had sought the transfer of the three judges to Patna, Jammu and Kashmir and Guwahati. Apparently, the chief justice has agreed to this request and the transfer orders have been issued.
Then came the news that the chief justice of India has set up a committee of inquiry under the ‘in-house’ procedure consisting of the chief justice of the Andhra Pradesh High Court, the chief justice of the Madras High Court and the chief justice of the Patna High Court.
There were still no details in the press about the actual incident and the entire episode continued to be referred to as a ‘sex scandal’.
What is interesting about these reports is not what they reveal, but what they conceal. It is a conspiracy of silence. If the information is now available to the chief justice of India, why is it not being made public? Do we, the public, not have the right to information? Ironically, the morning newspapers brought the news that the Freedom of Information Act has been passed. What are the legitimate limits of the right to freedom of information and the requirement of keeping information a secret? This episode would make an interesting case study.
What exactly is at stake here? There is much that should concern the nation about the incident. This is not a case about the private morality of the judges, be that as it may, but about the abuse of office that they hold. What has not been made known is that the three women in question are women lawyers practising in their courts.
What is at stake here is the pollution of the stream of justice at its very source. There must be countless cases in which these women appeared before these very judges day in and day out of their routine practice. Can one honestly say that in such a situation justice is being done “without fear or favour”? Judges swear on oath of allegiance to “bear true faith” to the Constitution and do justice “without fear or favour”. How well have these judges honoured this oath?
What is at stake here is the cynical use of women as sexual commodities. The usual justifications have already begun making the rounds. If the women have not complained, what objection can anyone else have, it is asked. What is lost sight of is the fact that the judges are in a position of dominance vis-à-vis the women, in a position to do favours that pertain to their office.
What is at stake here is the cynical use of public office, the seat of justice, for personal petty gain. It is irrelevant whether the women consented or not. The usual blame game will now begin — blaming the victim rather than the perpetrator; the usual loose talk about the character of the woman in question; the usual attempt to cover up by diverting attention from the actual incident to the motives of those who brought the incident to light.
What is at stake here is the perception of women as sexual commodities by those who are responsible for sitting in judgment over cases brought for and on behalf of women.
The issues at stake here concern one half of Indians. With what faith can Indian women approach the courts demanding the right to equality, the right to be free from sexual harassment or rape and the right to live with dignity, if the persecution of judges who sit in judgment over them is non-negotiable?
In the circumstances, the suggested solution is worse than the offence — to transfer them to Patna, Guwahati and Jammu and Kashmir. Why these particular cities? Are they not an integral part of the country, or are they mere islands within the country that are considered ‘punishment postings’ where people are sent a la ‘crossing Kala Pani’ of the old days? To the credit of the Guwahati Bar Association, it protested against the proposed transfer.
The only decent thing to do is for the chief justice of India to disclose full details of the incident so that rumour-mongering comes to an end. This would be in the best interest of the judiciary itself.
As things stand, the rumours are making the rounds that there were more than three judges involved, that the women were professional call girls, many of which are baseless. We, the people, have the right to know. The conspiracy of silence must be broken.
The judges in question must neither be assigned any judicial functions pending an inquiry nor be transferred to sit in judgment over others. Two of the judges are stated to be additional judges. They must not be confirmed. If there is prima facie evidence against the one remaining judge, the chief justice must recommend his impeachment.
It is time for all concerned bar associations, bar councils and other male-dominated bodies of legal professionals to act and ensure that there is no cover-up. There is little point in showing sympathy to women in judgments and in seminar rooms, or in recommending the death penalty for rape if we cannot deal with the men who dispense justice.
There are contempt of court petitions pending in the Karnataka High Court against some of the publications for disclosing details of the incident. Civil society and women’s organisations must demand that justice is now done when it comes to the judges themselves.
The law of contempt can offer no solution to the crisis of credibility in the judiciary that this incident has thrown up. One positive aspect of the incident is that it is only after the chief justice of the high court issued a public notice inviting information that he received 20 representations, which led to the discovery of the truth.
Let the truth now be made public.

Judge accused of molesting 2 rape survivors in UP

A sitting judicial magistrate sexually assaulted them

UP: Two rape victims claim that a sitting judicial magistrate sexually assaulted them. The girls
alleged that when they went to the magistrate’s chamber to give their statement, he allegedly
made them strip and molested them.
One of the girls is a minor and the police have filed a complaint. The girls also claimed that the
judge threatened them to not speak of the incident to anyone.
Lawyers and the general public in Gonda launched a protest against the judge.

JUDGE SENDING OBSCENE SMS TO WOMEN

Lucknow Taking cognisance of the allegation against a civil Judge (junior division) of
Budaun court that he sent obscene SMSes to a woman lecturer, the Registrar General of
Allahabad High Court today sought a report from the district judge into the matter.
The civil judge of Gunnor sub-division court of Budaun — Pramod Kumar Gangwar— was
accused of sending obscene SMSes from his cellphone to a woman lecturer of Classic
College of Law, Bareilly. A lecturer of the same college, Vivek Gupta, was named in the FIR
lodged by the victim while Gangwar’s name surfaced in the primary investigation.
Registrar General Dinesh Gupta said, “The district judge of Budaun has been asked to
send a detailed report into the allegations. Appropriate action would be taken on the basis
of the report.”
District Judge Suresh Kumar Srivastava said, “I have asked the Bareilly district police to
send a report about the matter. The report on the basis of the police inquiry would be sent
to the Allahabad High Court Registrar General.”
“I am not aware about the matter, as the Bareilly police did not intimate me before initiating
the probe against the civil judge. They should have informed me when they had received
any such complaint,” the judge added.
Meanwhile, Bareilly CO II Raj Kumar, who is investigating the case, today recorded the
statement of the victim. “I have collected the call details of the cellphone used for sending
the SMSes, but I have yet to get the address of the person who is subscriber of the SIM
card,” he said.
“The probe is on to verify if the accused in the case were present on the location recorded
in the call details when the SMSes were sent. The details of the findings of the
investigation would be sent to the Budaun district court to seek the direction,” the CO
added.
Asked if the investigation was earlier conducted into the matter, Raj Kumar said, “The SP
(Crime) had initiated probe into the matter, but I am not aware if the investigation had
reached to any conclusion.”
The woman lecturer had lodged an FIR at the Mahila police station on Thursday alleging
she had received obscene SMSes on her cellphone involving her colleague Vivek Gupta.
The preliminary inquiry into the case by the police yesterday had found that the mobile
phone used in the crime belongs to the civil judge.
Lokayukta: DC demanded sex from widow
In the midst of a national outrage over former Haryana DGP SPS Rathore molesting a teenager,
the Karnataka Lokayukta on Saturday made a startling revelation that the state government was
shielding a top bureaucrat who had demanded sexual favours from a young widow.
Lokayukta Justice Santosh Hegde disclosed that the official concerned, who was the deputy
commissioner of one of the districts when he demanded sex from the widow in return for
discharging his duties as public servant, has since been promoted to a senior position.
Justice Hegde, in the course of an interaction with journalists at the Deccan Herald office
Saturday afternoon, said the unnamed widow had dared the deputy commissioner and
approached the Lokayukta’s office with a complaint against the officer.
On examination of the complaint, the Lokayukta had found sufficient grounds to recommend to
the state government the suspension and prosecution of the DC concerned. The
recommendation was subsequently considered by the concerned department head as well as
the chief secretary and both endorsed it.
But, according to Justice Hegde, no action was initiated against the DC as the same official who
had endorsed the recommendation subsequently found no basis for initiating departmental action
against him. Instead, the official cleared the DC’s name for promotion in the super-scale.
Presently, the official holds a senior position in the government.
The widow, in her late 20s, had approached the DC with a representation to sort out some
problems. But she was shocked when the DC demanded sex.
Justice Hegde did not identify the official in question or the complainant. Nor did he offer to name
the district where the official was serving as deputy commissioner. But the incident has
happened sometime in the course of last three years as Justice Hegde took over as the
Lokayukta in mid-2006.
3-year jail term for ‘dirty’ judge

Family court judge Ramrao Gangaram Bhise attempted to get sexual favours from a housewife in
1997
Family court judge Ramrao Gangaram Bhise’s attempts to extract sexual favours, in addition to a
bribe, from a housewife, Alka Gaikwad — who had sought an increase in her monthly
maintenance allowance from her estranged husband, in 1997 — proved costly to him.
Pronouncing him guilty on both counts, the special court hearing anti-corruption bureau (ACB)
matters sentenced him to three years rigorous imprisonment and a collective fine of Rs55, 000,
on Monday.
According to the FIR in the case registered against Bhise by the ACB, Suryakant Gaikwad had
filed for divorce from his wife, Alka, before the Bandra family court. Alka, a housewife, in turn,
filed a petition seeking mutual cohabitation with her husband. The then family court judge, Meera
Khadakkar, directed the husband to pay her an interim maintenance allowance of Rs750 per
month.
Subsequently, in January 1997, Alka filed another application before the same family court (now
presided over by Bhise) seeking to increase the monthly maintenance amount to Rs3,500. “On
October 27, 1997, Bhise issued an interim order, increasing the maintenance allowance to
Rs2,000 to be paid by Suryakan to his estranged wife till the disposal of the case. Immediately
after issuing the order, Bhise asked Alka to meet him and gave her his residential telephone
number, asking her to call him when the court hours ended. He told her that he would ask her
husband to pay her a lump sum of Rs2 lakh in addition to the monthly maintenance, provided she
called him up,” the FIR states.
When she called up the judge at 7 pm the same day, Bhise told her that she would have to pay
him a sum of Rs2,000 in addition to granting his sexual favours if she wanted an order in her
favour. He also directed her to meet him at the Haji Ali bus stop with the bribe amount the
following evening.
“Alka approached the ACB, which sought permission from the Chief Justice of the Bombay High
Court before laying a trap on the first class judicial magistrate (Bhise). The HC while granting the
permission designated a court official to bear witness to the events leading to the trap. Alka,
under video camera surveillance of ACB sleuths, along with the court official and other women
witnesses met Bhise at 8.30 pm at the Haji Ali bus stop. Bhise took hold of Alka’s wrist and when
she protested, repeated his demands,” the FIR states.
Alka was then taken to a nearby hotel, Sharda, where the judge accepted the bribe amount. But
before he could do anything else, ACB sleuths swooped in and arrested him.
Rajasthan judge is indicted for seeking sexual favours

Chief Justice of India G B Pattanaik retires tonight and he doesn’t have much to write home about
on the unprecedented drive he launched to enforce judicial accountability.
After the PPSC scam fiasco, reported in The Indian Express today, comes the case of the
Rajasthan judge who has been indicted in a sex scandal and yet has escaped action—pending
another inquiry.
On December 14, a three-judge committee set up by Pattanaik confirmed the ‘‘involvement’’ of
Justice Arun Madan of the Rajasthan High Court in a proposition to a woman doctor to have sex
with him in exchange for a judicial favour.
The committee, headed by the Chief Justice of the Punjab and Haryana High Court Justice B K
Roy, submitted its report to Pattanaik, indicting Madan on a complaint made from Jodhpur by the
woman concerned, Sunita Malviya.
But Pattanaik has not announced any action against Madan. When contacted by The Indian
Express, Pattanaik confirmed that the committee had indicted Madan and his ‘‘bad reputation’’ in
seeking sexual favours in return for judicial ones.
However, Pattanaik said that no action was being taken since the committee had also mentioned
allegations of corruption against Madan. And so he had ordered a further inquiry by the same
committee into the corruption charges.
When asked what he did with the indictment of Madan in the sex scandal, Pattanaik said, ‘‘That
is on hold because I could not have taken piecemeal action against him….I am praying to God
that the final report will give some tangible material to take action.’’
Highly placed sources told The Indian Express that when the committee recorded statements last
week in Jodhpur of about 30 persons over four days, it also came to know of several allegations
of corruption against Madan and another judge of the same high court. The committee put these
on record as well.
Pattanaik said that when he summoned Madan to New Delhi last week, he did not raise the sex
scandal issue and instead limited himself to saying that he was ordering a further inquiry into
corruption allegations.
In effect, Pattanaik has now passed the Rajasthan buck to his successor Justice V N Khare.
The gist of Malviya’s complaint is that Madan made a sexual proposition to her in October
through a deputy registrar of the high court, Govind Kalwani, who said that the judge would help
her, in turn, get out of a criminal case booked against her.
With this, Pattanaik’s much-touted in-house judicial accountability seems to have hit a wall. The
first committee’s report into the PPSC scam exonerated one judge despite evidence and let two
others off with a mere slap on the wrist. The third committee is now busy probing the involvement
of judges in the Mysore sex scam.
Ten reasons why criminals in khaki get away
Siddharth Varadarajan
Behind every man like S.P.S. Rathore who abuses his authority stand the generals and
footsoldiers who help and support him. We need to take them all down.
S.P.S. Rathore, the criminal former top cop of Haryana, may appear alone today but we must
never forget that he was able to get away with the sexual molestation of a young child and the
illegal harassment of her family for 19 years because he had hundreds of men who supported
him in his effort to evade justice.
The fact that these men – fellow police officers, bureaucrats, politicians, lawyers, judges, school
administrators – were willing to bend the system to accommodate a man accused of molesting a
minor speaks volumes for the moral impoverishment of our establishment and country. Decent
societies shun those involved in sexual offences against children. Even criminals jailed for
`ordinary’ crimes like murder treat those serving time for molesting children as beyond the pale.
But in India, men like Rathore have their uses for their masters, so the system circles its wagons
and protects them.
The CBI’s appeal may lead to the enhancement of Rathore’s sentence and perhaps even the
slapping of abetment to suicide charges, since his young victim killed herself to put an end to the
criminal intimidation her family was being subjected to by Rathore and his men. But the systemic
rot which the case has exposed will not be remedied unless sustained public pressure is put on
Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and Union Home Minister P. Chidambaram, two men who have
it in their power to push for simple remedies in the way the Indian law enforcement and justice
delivery system works.
First, abolish the need for official, i.e. political sanction to prosecute bureaucrats, policemen and
security forces personnel when they are accused of committing crimes. The original intent behind
this built-in stay-out-of-jail card was to protect state functionaries from acts done in the course of
discharging their duties in good faith. Somewhere along the line, this has come to mean
protecting our custodians of law and order when they murder innocent civilians (eg. the infamous
Panchalthan case in Kashmir where the trial of army men indicted by the CBI for murdering five
villagers in 2000 still cannot take place because the Central government will not grant
permission), or assault or molest women and children. No civilised, democratic society grants
such impunity. It is disgusting to see former officials and bureaucrats from Haryana saying how
they had wanted Rathore prosecuted but were prevented from doing so because of pressure.
Such officials should either be made formally to testify in a criminal case against the politicians
who so pressured them or they should themselves be hauled up for perverting the course of
justice.
Second, stop talking about how making the police and army answerable to the law will somehow
demoralise their morale. Does anybody care about the morale of ordinary citizens any more? Or
the morale of upright police and army officers, who do not think it is right for their colleagues to be
able to get away with criminal acts?
Third, bring an end to the cosy relationship between the police and politicians. Rathore was
protected by four chief ministers of Haryana. He served them and they served him by ensuring
his unfettered rise. It is absurd that the Indian Police is still governed by a colonial-era Act dating
back to 1861. A number of commissions have made recommendations for reforming the police
over the years; but no government or political party wants to give up its ability to use and misuse
the police for their own benefit
Fourth, ensure that police officers who abuse their authority and engage in mala fide
prosecutions are dismissed from service and sentenced to jail for a long period of time. Mr.
Chidambaram should use the considerable resources at his command to find out who were the
policemen involved in filing 11 bogus cases against the teenaged brother of the young girl
Rathore molested. He should then make sure criminal proceedings are initiated against all of
them. The message must go out to every policeman in the country: If you abuse the law at the
behest of a superior, you will suffer legal consequences.
Fifth, ensure that criminal charges against law enforcement personnel are fast-tracked as a
matter of routine so that a powerful defendant is not able to use his position to delay proceedings
the way Rathore did for years on end. The destruction or disappearance of material evidence in
such cases must be treated as a grave offence with strict criminal liability imposed on the
individual responsible for breaking the chain of custody.
Sixth, empower the National Human Rights Commission with teeth so that police departments
and state governments cannot brush aside their orders as happened in the Rathore case. This
would also require appointing to the NHRC women and men who have a proven record of
defending human rights in their professional life, something that is done today only in the breach.
The attitude of the Manmohan Singh government to this commission and others like the National
Commission for Women (NCW) and National Commission for Minorities is shocking. Vacancies
are not filled for months on end.
Seventh, ensure the early enactment of pending legislation broadening the ambit of sexual
crimes, including sexual crimes against children. Between rape, defined as forced penetrative
sex, and the vague, Victorian-era crime of `outraging the modesty of a woman’, the Indian Penal
Code recognises no other form of sexual violence. As a result, all forms of sexual molestation
and assault short of rape attract fairly lenient punishment, of the kind Rathore got. In his case, the
judge did not even hand down the maximum sentence, citing concerns for the criminal’s age.
Sadly, he did not take into account the age of the victim and neither does the IPC, which fails to
distinguish between `outraging the modesty’ of an adult woman and a young child.
A draft law changing these provisions and bringing India into line with the rest of the modern
world has been pending with the NCW and Law Ministry for years. Perhaps the government may
now be shamed into pushing it through Parliament at the earliest.
Eighth, take steps to introduce a system of protection of witnesses and complainants. The fate
that the family of Rathore’s young victim had to endure is testament to the fact that people who
seek justice in India do so at their own peril.
Ninth, ensure that robust interrogation techniques like narco-analysis, which are routinely used
against other alleged criminals, are also employed against police officers accused of crimes.
Tenth, the media and the higher judiciary must also turn the light inward and ask themselves
whether they were also derelict in their duty. The Rathore case did not attract the kind of constant
media attention it deserved, nor do other cases involving serving police officers accused of
crimes against women, workers, peasants and minorities. As for the upper courts, their record is
too patchy to inspire confidence. It was, after all, the high court which chose to disregard the
CBI’s request for including abetment to suicide charges.
Keywords: Siddharth Varadarajan, S.P.S. Rathore, criminals, khaki, former DGP of
Haryana, custodians, sexual violence, NHRC
Porbandar judge accused of dowry harassment

A complaint has been filed against District and Sessions judge of Porbandar for allegedly
harassing his daughter-in-law for dowry, police said here on Sunday.
Darshana Dave, a native of Amreli, has filed a complaint against her husband Kinnar, father-inlaw
and district judge Arvind Dave, mother-in-law Pratibha and brother-in-law Prashant, the
police added.
Darshana married Kinnar two years ago. Her complaint says that she was harassed from the
beginning, and was even beaten up by the husband and in-laws, who were demanding Rs 10
lakh as dowry.
She has also alleged that she was thrown out of the house a few months back, and her husband
is now seeking divorce, the police said.
Amreli Superintendent of Police H R Muliyana confirmed to have received the complaint against
the judge and others. He said that action will be taken after verifying the complaint.
This is the second complaint related to dowry harassment filed against a judge in the state in the
recent past.
Earlier, a woman had filed a complaint against additional sessions judge of Jetpur after her
daughter and the judge’s wife committed suicide.
Gurgaon judge to also face dowry harassment charge

Gurgaon’s Chief Judicial Magistrate Ravneet Garg, booked for the murder of his wife, will also
face dowry harassment charge, police here said Monday.
Police have issued notices to the CJM’s father K.K. Garg and mother Rachna Garg, who have
also been named in the dowry harassment case.
The CJM’s father reached here Monday morning from Haryana’s Panchkula town and contacted
police, who wanted to question him.
“We had called CJM’s parents…K.K. Garg was questioned by special investigation team (SIT),”
Gurgaon Police Commissioner Alok Mittal said.
Mittal said on the basis of written complaint filed by the parents of the CJM’s wife Geetanjali,
penal sections of dowry harassment and extra-marital affair were included in the FIR lodged
against the CJM Saturday.
Geetanjali, 24, bore three bullet wounds – on her chin, chest and stomach – but no bullets were
found in her body that was recovered here Thursday. The CJM’s licensed firearm was found near
the body, police said.
Mittal said two bullets were seized from the scene of crime and would be sent for ballistic
examination Monday, a day after ballistic experts examined the crime spot.
“The SIT Sunday questioned two women relatives of Ravneet Garg for hours at his government
allotted house here in the Officers Colony,” said Mittal.
“We have asked CJM to produce supporting evidences to prove his statement,” he said.
The CJM allegedly said that his driver and domestic help may throw some light on his wife’s
death.
Judge Garg’s in-laws alleged that two cars were provided to the accused on his and his family’s
demand. Rs.2 lakh were also delivered to him at the time of the admission of his daughters in
school in May.
Geetanjali’s brother Pradeep Aggarwal Saturday lodged a first information report against Garg
and his parents, accusing them of murder.
“Ravneet and Geetanjali got married in November 2007. Everything was fine for a few years but
the attitude of Ravneet and his parents towards Geetanjali started changing after she delivered
two baby girls (now aged around four and a half and three years),” Aggarwal said in his
complaint.
He demanded a probe by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) into his sister’s murder.

“There is a higher court than the court of justice and that is the court of conscience It supercedes all other courts. ”
– Mahatma Gandhi

Alleging Sexual Harassment By High Court Judge, a Junior Judge Quits

NEW DELHI: A woman additional judge in Gwalior has resigned alleging sexual harassment by a judge of the Madhya Pradesh High Court. The judge asked her to “dance to an item song” and influenced her transfer to a remote location, she has alleged in a complaint to the President, the Chief Justice of India and the Union Law Minister.

Chief Justice of India RM Lodha told NDTV on Monday morning, “I haven’t received the complaint officially… once I get it I will go through the complaint. Normally we ask for a report on the complaint from the Chief Justice of the High Court. In this case, I will seek a report from the Chief Justice of Madhya Pradesh High Court and take action accordingly. I will do my best for the institution.”

The additional judge resigned on July 15 and wrote to the CJI and others on August 1, Friday evening. “If this is how a mother, sister and wife can be treated, who is herself no less than a judicial officer duty-bound to protect society and law, what constitutional goals are we serving?” said the woman, who ironically headed a Vishaka committee against sexual harassment.

She has alleged that the High Court judge constantly pestered her and once sent her a message through an official to “perform dance on an item song” at a function at his home. She said she excused herself saying it was her daughter’s birthday.

She also alleged that when she spurned the judge’s “various advances and malicious aspirations”, he targeted her professionally. “The administrative judge, along with district judge and district judge (inspection), possibly made a false, frivolous, baseless and malicious reporting to the chief justice of MP and got me transferred on July 8, in the mid-academic session of my daughters to a remote place Sidhi by overruling the transfer policy of MP HC,” she has complained.

She said her appeal for an eight-month extension to allow her daughter’s academic year to finish was rejected and has alleged that the judge threatened to “spoil my career completely,” when she pleaded against the transfer.

“I was left with no option but to resign, so, I resigned on July 15 in compelling, humiliating and disgraceful circumstances to save my dignity, womanhood, self-esteem and career of my daughter,” she has written.

Editorial : CRIMES CONFESSION by CJI & Others ?
– Questions Unanswered
Honourable CJI , Chairman NHRC & other public servants have failed to answer notice / questions in 30 days. Thereby , they have confessed to crimes on their own. Repeated silence to interrogation questions / charges amounts to admission of crimes by the accused.
Read INTERROGATE-JUDGES-POLICE

https://dalit-online.blogspot.com/2019/03/interrogate-judges-and-police.html?m=1

Who will bell the cat ? Who will legally prosecute erring Judges and police?

Your’s
NAGARAJA MYSURU RAGHUPATHI

Legal Notice to Honourable Chief Justice of India
To,
Honourable Chief Justice of India,
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA,
New Delhi.

Honourable Sir ,

Subject : Legal Notice to Chief Justice of India

Are Judges , Police PERFECT ? Satya Harishchandra ?

Hereby , I challenge Chief Justice of India in the exercise of my FUNDAMENTAL DUTIES as a citizen of india , that subject to conditions I will legally prove the crimes of few judges , police , public servants within the government service and other criminals. Is the CJI ready to book those criminals , traitors , anti nationals ?
Since 29 years I am appealing to apex court for justice concerning various public issues , no justice in sight but injustices meted out one after another. But the same judges are SHAMELESSLY taking huge pay perks for years. Parasites feeding on Indian Public. Whenever questions of accountability are asked judges level contempt charges against the questioner or police fix him in fake cases or he is silenced by threats , murders , denial of jobs , etc.
Since 29 years in many ways they are trying to silence me. Just take the recent example of Justice Karnan who leveled corruption charges against specific judges with CJI. Instead of conducting a fair investigation into the matter , CJI tried to silence him by serving him contempt notice.

Our Judges , Police are NOT Perfect Not Satya Harischandras . There are criminals as well as honest people side by side in judiciary & police. We whole heartedly respect honest few in judiciary , police & public service. But we detest corrupt judges , corrupt police. Honest Judges & Police are not coming into open to prosecute their corrupt colleagues, why ? silenced ?

Criminalization of all wings of government has taken place , unfit people are in the positions of power. Corruption in judiciary , police , CBI , CVC , Public service is rampant. Now MAFIA is at work. Only few scandals , scams become public , many are buried. If one criminal public servant is caught other public servant who is also a criminal conducts name sake investigation , gives report , clean chit. Law courts rely on the government reports as evidences , courts are not bothered about credibility of reports or investigations. It is quid pro quo. Therefore technically criminal public servants are never proved for their crimes & convicted , as investigation itself is not fair.

A Crime may happen without the knowledge of police but cann’t continue for years without the connivance of police. A Crime reported to court cann’t continue for years without connivance of judges.

At the bottom of the paper , I have given web sites about few ACB raids on government officials and unearthing of crores worth property. How they have earned it , by misusing their official positions. Therefore government reports , records prepared by these officials , investigations conducted by corrupt police are suspect. But Law courts in various cases , considers government reports , records , statements of government officials as sacrosanct . Therefore in many cases injustice is meted out by court , as they depend on reports of corrupt government officials , corrupt police.

The public servants & the government must be role models in law abiding acts , for others to emulate & follow. if a student makes a mistake it is excusable & can be corrected by the teacher. if the teacher himself makes a mistake , all his students will do the same mistake. if a thief steals , he can be caught , legally punished & reformed . if a police himself commits crime , many thieves go scot-free under his patronage. even if a police , public servant commits a crime , he can be legally prosecuted & justice can be sought by the aggrieved. just think , if a judge himself that too of apex court of the land himself commits crime – violations of RTI Act , constitutional rights & human rights of public and obstructs the public from performing their constitutional fundamental duties , what happens ?
“Power will go to the hands of rascals, , rogues and freebooters. All Indian leaders will be of low calibre and men of straw. They will have sweet tongues and silly hearts. They will fight among themselves for power and will be lost in political squabbles . A day would come when even air & water will be taxed.” Sir Winston made this statement in the House of Commons just before the independence of India & Pakistan. Sadly , the forewarning of Late Winston Churchill has been proved right by some of our criminal , corrupt people’s representatives , police , public servants & Judges.

I don’t know whether secretariat staff of CJI office & DARPG / DPG officials are forwarding my appeals for justice , e-mails to you or not. They will be held accountable for their lapses if any. This notice is against the repeated failure of constitutional duties & indirect collusion with criminals by previous CHIEF JUSTICEs OF INDIA. Notice is served against them , to the office of CJI , NOT personally against you.
Please refer my appeal for justice through DARPG ;

DLGLA/E/2013/00292

DEPOJ/E/2013/00679
In india democracy is a farce , freedom a mirage. the most basic freedom RIGHT TO INFORMATION & EXPRESSION , is not honoured by the government,as the information opens up the crimes of V.V.I.Ps & leads to their ill-gotten wealth. The public servants are least bothered about the lives of people or justice to them. these type of fat cats , parasites are a drain on the public exchequer . these people want ,wish me to see dead , wish to see HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH closed . so that, a voice against injustices is silenced forever , the crimes of V.V.I.Ps closed , buried forever.

To my numerous appeals , HRW’s appeals to you ,you have not yet replied. It clearly shows that you are least bothered about the lives of people or justice to them .it proves that you are hell bent to protect the criminals at any cost. you are just pressurising the police to enquire me ,to take my statement, to repeatedly call me to police station all with a view to silence me.all of you enjoy “legal immunity privileges” ,why don’t you have given powers to the police / investigating officer to summon all of you for enquiry ?or else why don’t all of you are not appearing before the police voluntarily for enquiry ?at the least why don’t all of you are not sending your statement about the case to the police either through legal counsel or through post? you are aiding criminals ,by denying me job oppurtunities in R.B.I CURRENCY NOTE PRESS mysore , city civil court ,bangalore , distict court , mysore ,etc & by illegally closing my newspaper. Even Press accreditation to me as a web journalist is denied till date. there is a gross, total mismatch between your actions and your oath of office. this amounts to public cheating & moral turpitude on your part.
1.you are making contempt of the very august office you hold.
2.you are making contempt of the constitution of india.
3.you are making contempt of citizens of india.
4.you are sponsoring & aiding terorrism & organized crime.
5.you are violating the fundamental & human rights of the citizens of india and of neighbouring countries.
6.you are violating & making contempt of the U.N HUMAN RIGHTS CHARTER to which india is a signatory.
7.you are obstructing me from performing my fundamental duties as a citizen of india.

8. As a result of your gross negligence of constitutional duties you have caused me damages / losses to the tune of RUPEES TWO CRORE ONLY.
9. You are responsible for crime cover ups mentioned in my RTI Appeals , PILs and continuation of those crimes unabated.
10. You are responsible for denial of information, which vindicates the crimes of powers that be.
11. You are responsible for physical assaults , murder attempts on me.
12. You are responsible for job denials to me at NIE , PES Engineering college , RBI Press , Mysore , Bangalore Courts.
13. You are responsible for my illegal retrenchment from RPG Cables , denial of medical care to me towards occupational health problems.
14. You are responsible for denying me legal aid.
15. You are responsible for illegal closure of my news paper.
16. You are responsible for denial of press accreditation to me as a web journalist till date.
17. You are responsible for repeatedly passing on my appeals to police. So that they can take statements , close the file under the threat of police power.
18. You have violated my Human Rights & Fundamental Rights.
19. In terms of Integrity , Honesty You & other public servants are nowhere near Baba Saheb B R Ambedkar , Mahatma Gandhi & Satya Harishchandra . Many Public servants are UNFIT to be in their posts.

You are hereby called upon to Pay damages to me and SHOW-CAUSE within 30 days , why you cann’t be legally prosecuted for the above mentioned crimes . If you don’t answer it will be admission of the charges by you. It will amount to confession of crimes on your own.

If i am repeatedly called to police station or else where for the sake of investigations , the losses i do incurr as a result like loss of wages , transportation , job , etc must be borne by the government. prevoiusly the police / IB personnel repeatedly called me the complainant (sufferer of injustices) to police station for questioning , but never called the guilty culprits even once to police station for questioning , as the culprits are high & mighty . this type of one sided questioning must not be done by police or investigating agencies . if anything untoward happens to me or to my family members like loss of job , meeting with hit & run accidents , loss of lives , etc , the jurisdictional police together with above mentioned accussed public servants , Chief Justice of India & Jurisdictional District Magistrate will be responsible for it. Even if criminal nexus levels fake charges , police file fake cases against me or my dependents to silence me , this complaint is & will be effective.
if anything untoward happens to me or my dependents , the government of india is liable to pay Rs. TWO crore as compensation to survivors of my family. if my whole family is eliminated by the criminal nexus ,then that compensation money must be donated to Indian Army Welfare Fund. afterwards , the money must be recovered by GOI as land arrears from the salary , pension , property , etc of guilty judges , police officials , public servants & Constitutional fuctionaries.
Thanking you. Jai Hind , Vande Mataram.

Send reply to :
Nagaraja Mysuru Raghupathi
Editor , Dalit Online,
LIG 2 , NO 761 , HUDCO First Stage,
Laxmikantanagar , Hebbal ,
Mysuru – 570017.

Date : 10.03.2019…………………………………………..your’s sincerely,
Place : Mysore , India………………………………………….Nagaraja Mysuru Raghupathi

Answer Honourable CJI SCI , Honourable Chairman , NHRC & Honourable DG & IG of Police GOK

To
Honourable Chairman
National Human Rights Commission
New Delhi.

Honourable Sir,

Since 1990 , I as a citizen of India have brought to notice of SCI , NHRC & Police various crimes hoping for justice to the suffering public. Supreme court of India has enough time to judge trivial issues concerning movies , cricket , etc but it doesn’t have time to judge public issues concerning national security , accountability of judges , police , public servants in all these 29 years. After repeatedly appealing for justice , powers that be have meted out injustices to me personally to silence me. SCI has failed in it’s duties since 29 years , but judges are taking hefty pay , perks from our money , public money without feeling of shame or guilt.

Hereby , I request Honourable CJI , SCI , Honourable Chairman , NHRC & Honourable DG & IG of Police , Government of Karnataka , to provide information by answering following questions :

Subject : REPLY / OBJECTIONS in Case No. 888/10/15/2014

Following points are my reply / objections to case closure refer your letter dated 18.09.2018. My whole hearted respects to honest few in judiciary , police & public service.

1. Since 1990 how many applications of PIL , RTI are received by SCI , NHRC & Karnataka Police from me NAGARAJA M R ?
2. How many show cause notices are served to CJI , SCI by Nagaraja M R , since 1990 ?
3. Details of action taken in each case. If not why ?
4. Why compensation amount is not yet paid by CJI , SCI or NHRC to NAGARAJA M R , till date ?
5. How CJI , SCI & NHRC are going to protect the lives , civil rights of NAGARAJA M R & his family members ? If anything untoward happens to NAGARAJA M R & his family members CJI , SCI is responsible together with NHRC , jurisdiction police & district magistrate.
6. Why no criminal legal prosecution of CJI , NHRC Chairman , police , public servants for their failure of duties ?
7. Honourable CJI , SCI , Honourable Chairman , NHRC & Honourable DG & IG of Police , Government of Karnataka read full case details at following web sites & honestly
ANSWER :
https://sites.google.com/site/dalitoonline/answer-cji—loya-murder , https://sites.google.com/site/dalitoonline/interrogate-chief-justice ,

8. Statement of police are half truth.
9. Statements / complaints made by me in my e mails / e news paper when I was in free & fair atmosphere holds good forever. It overrides statements made before police.
10. Some of the complaints made by me are pending since years/ decades. Other than police summoning me repeatedly to question me , to take my statements , What else they have done? Just based on my statements before police , police have filed case closures subsequently NHRC / SCI also followed the same course. what other action did they take for years ? Did police , NHRC / SCI summon high & mighty people mentioned in my complaints even once ? Did they take their statements ? Did they conduct investigations? What are the outcome of those investigations ? Did police find out the persons & their motives for silencing me ? Did police police take action against them ? Have police formally requested government & supreme court for sanction to enquire powerful people enjoying legal immunity privileges? If not why ?
11. Fed up with inaction of police for years and understanding their practical difficulties I have appealed to NHRC and Supreme Court of India by way of PILs seeking justice. Till date I have not got justice from NHRC or SCI.
12. Public servants take thousands of rupees salary , perks every month on time without fail from public exchequer. But some of them don’t do their duties properly in time. public made to wait for justice indefinitely for years together.
13. Is it not the duty of government to protect life , rights of all citizens and to enable them to perform their duties ? If goverment cannot do it’s duties then such public servants are waste bodies.
14. Does not the denial of justice in the above cases to me amount to cover up of crimes by police & judges ?
15. I have answered questions of police , IB number of times now it is the turn of police, judges to answer my questions seeking truth. Please read following web pages and answer within 30 days :
https://dalitsonline.blogspot.com/2018/08/torture-of-corrupt.html?m=1

16. In war soldiers cut off food / medicine supplies to enemy troops to cripple them , to reduce their fighting strength. In the same way my job opportunities in NIE Engineering college mysore PES college mandya RBI Press Mysuru RPG Cables mysuru Mysuru court & Bangalore courts were denied illegally. Who was behind it ?
17. Who behind denying registration to my news paper & denying press accreditation to me ?
18. Who behind physical assaults on me , threats to me , blank calls to me , stalking over my family ?
19. What action taken against those persons ?
20. I request you for justice , legal prosecution of guilty , legal prosecution of police and judges who by their inaction helped in crimes cover up.
21. As state police are not empowered hereby I request you for a transparent SIT probe monitored by NHRC & SCI.
22. Hereby I state if anything untoward happens to me or to my family members dependents NHRC will be jointly liable with CJI , jurisdiction police & District Magistrate for the crime.

23. Why i was not permitted to appear as an Amicus Curie before Jain commission of enquiry probing Rajiv gandhi assassination case ?
24. I have brought to the notice of SCI land grabbing of hebbal lake , beml quarters lake, hootagalli lake in the very early stages. Due to your inaction grabbings took place continues till date. Are you not complicit in the crimes ?
25. Why no proper action taken against management of RPG Cables for their crimes ?
26. Why i was not given legal aid to pursue my cases in SCI ?
27. If a commoner murders a person it is a crime if the same act done by police is it not a crime ?
28. If a commoner gives a false statement / false affidavit it is a crime , if the same act done by a judge, police, advocate is it not a crime ?
29. I have given list of crimes committed by judges , police , advocates to you earlier , still no proper legal action taken against culprits why ? Are the rules , law different for them ?
30. Few advocates , police , intellectuals ( ? ) have threatened me over phone , through social media , etc to silence me. They are nothing but stooges , cronies of corrupt. Why no legal action against them for Obstructing my Fundamental Duties and for violations of my fundamental rights , human rights ?
31. I have appealed to SCI regarding cases of atrocities against Dalits. Till date no proper legal action taken why ?
32. Are not the delays by you amount to denial of justice by way of time bar of case or death of applicant ?
33. Why SCI has not utilised my services to apprehend criminals within public service ?

Date : 10.03. 2019 Thank you
Place : Mysuru Nagaraja Mysuru Raghupathi
Edited, printed , published owned by NAGARAJA.M.R. @ # LIG-2 No 761,
HUDCO FIRST STAGE , OPP WATER WORKS , LAXMIKANTANAGAR , HEBBAL
,MYSURU – 570017 KARNATAKA INDIA Cell : 91 8970318202
WhatsApp 91 8970318202

Home page :
http://eclarionofdalit.dalitonline.in/ ,
https://dalit-online.blogspot.com/

Contact : editor@dalitonline.in , editor.dalitonline@gmail.com

Judge Crime Cover up

DALIT ONLINE – e News Weekly
Spreading the light of humanity & freedom
Editor: Nagaraja.M.R.. Vol.15..Issue.32……..11 / 08 / 2019

Delhi Police Cover up Crimes by Judges

To,
Honourable Police Commissioner
New Delhi.

Please read documents at following web pages and answer :

https://www.scribd.com/document/402134326/INTERROGATE-Judges-Police , https://www.scribd.com/document/399783839/India-Sponsored-Terrorists , https://www.scribd.com/document/412164943/CJI-in-Jail ,

Thank you
Nagaraja Mysuru Raghupathi

Editorial : Contempt of Citizens by Judges
-Who will bell the cat ?

Why The kith And Kin Of Judges Being Mostly Considered For Appointments? Asks SCBA President
CJI Khehar also denies his son is on any state government panel

Home page :
http://eclarionofdalit.dalitonline.in/ ,
https://dalit-online.blogspot.com/

Contact : editor@dalitonline.in , editor.dalitonline@gmail.com

GOI Sponsored Terrorism

DALIT ONLINE – e News Weekly
Spreading the light of humanity & freedom
Editor: Nagaraja.M.R.. Vol.15..Issue.31…..04 / 08 / 2019

Government Sponsored Terrorism

As per law , violence committed, terror created against humanity is a crime. Terror committed by separatists , organizations , security personnel, police and public servants are all crimes. However irrespective of political affiliation party in power uses it to it’s advantage. By selectively prosecuting some while selectively shielding some. Law & Police must be impartial in their duties, however they work as stooges of rulers. Act professionally , Crush muslim terrorists in the same way crush hindu terrorists also. Crush maoists equally crush salwa judum and criminal industrialists , public officials. Why not crush corrupt police personnel who support mafia, anti nationals ?
Pakistan government Sponsored terrorism in india is a crime. In the same way Indian government Sponsored terrorism in srilanka, pakistan, elsewhere is also a crime. Why not prosecute indian government public servants responsible for these terror crimes under UAPA ?
TADA was rampantly misused by government at that time now present government will misuse UAPA. Please read the following articles and repeal UAPA.
UAPA Amendment : Why Giving Govt Power To Declare Individuals ‘Terrorists’ Is Problematic?
Without following any formal judicial process, a person can be labelled terrorist, and can be thrown to the ‘mob’ to suffer extra-judicial punishments.

The Central Government will be having the power to declare an individual as ‘terrorist’ if the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Amendment Bill 2019 passed by the Lok Sabha on July 24 becomes law.
This is a potentially dangerous amendment which will empower officials of Union Ministry to brand any person ‘a terrorist’, without following due process. The name of such a person will be included in the ‘Fourth Schedule’ proposed to be added in the parent Act. The only statutory remedy available to such a person is to make an application before the Central Government for de-notification, which will be considered by a Review Committee constituted by the Government itself.

Since the already stringent Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act 1967 (UAPA)has ample powers to deal with persons who support terrorist organizations and unlawful activities, one may wonder what is the real purpose behind the amendment.
As per Section 35 of the UAPA, the Government can notify any organization as terrorist organization “if it believes that the organization is involved in terrorism”. Such organizations can be included in the ‘First Schedule’ of the Act, which has so far 33 names. Any person who is associated with an organization included in the First Schedule as a member, supporter or fund raiser can be punished as per the existing provisions of Sections 38, 39 and 40 of the UAPA.

As the parent Act already has sufficient provisions to deal with individuals linked with terrorist organizations, what is additionally sought to be achieved with the power of designating an individual as terrorist?
It is surprising to note that the amendment does not provide any legal consequence in case an individual is designated a terrorist. The inclusion of one’s name in the Fourth Schedule as a terrorist per se will not lead to any conviction, imprisonment, fine, disqualifications or any sort of civil penalties.
So this is simply a power for the government to brand any one as a terrorist. It is hardly a consolation that such a declaration by itself will lead to any adverse legal consequence. An official designation as a terrorist will be akin to ‘civil death’ for a person, with social boycott, expulsion from job, hounding by media, and perhaps attack from self-proclaimed vigilante groups following. Like the Biblical character of Cain, such a person will be left to wander with a cursed label on his forehead.
In short, without following any formal judicial process, a person can be unilaterally labelled terrorist by the Government, and can be thrown to the ‘mob’ to suffer extra-judicial punishments, without any effective legal remedies.
This gets more chilling, when one reads the explanations offered by Union Home Minister Amit Shah for the amendment move.
Speaking during the Lok Sabha discussion, the Union Minister said that those who commit terrorist acts and those who promote terrorism and raise money for terrorists should be punished as terrorists. Of course one cannot have a different opinion regarding this, and the Act already has provisions in Chapter VI to deal with such individuals.
However, what the Home Minster said in addition to this is problematic. The Home Minister said :
“And then there are those who attempt to plant terrorist literature and terrorist theory in the minds of the young. Guns do not give rise to terrorist. The root of terrorism is the propaganda that is done to spread it, the frenzy that is spread.”
‘Terrorist literature’, ‘terrorist propaganda’ etc., are undefined, vague terms with a lot of potential for misuse. There have been instances of UAPA charges being slapped against people for merely possessing revolutionary literature. When a draconian law is based on loose concepts, officials might find it tempting to use it against those who are positioned against the government. For example, those who work for tribal rights, those who criticize deeds of military in troubled areas etc., could run the risk of being branded terrorists.

During the Lok Sabha debate, NCP member Supriya Sule cautioned that the amendment could be used to target human rights activists and social workers, and mentioned the UAPA case against famous academician and activist Anand Teltumbde.
In response to the concerns raised by Sule, the Union Minister said “those who work for Urban Maoists will not be spared”.
This loose term ‘Urban Maoists’, which so far has seen use only in social media and channel debates, has now officially entered the Parliamentary records with the Home Minister invoking it. Terms such as ‘anti national’ ‘urban naxals’ etc, are used without nuance and discretion to demonize and vilify ideological opponents and critics of government. It is worrying to see such terms getting used to justify an amendment which can have grave effect on the civil liberties of an individual.
To label a person ‘terrorist’ merely on the basis of speech and thoughts goes against the basic Constitutional canon that speech can be punished only if it gives rise to direct and imminent violence. This has been settled by the Supreme Court in a catena of decisions, while dealing with anti-terror laws and sedition.
A reading of the line of decisions in Balwant Singh v State of Punjab (sedition), Arup Bhuyan v State of Assam etc., makes this position on free speech law clear.
In Arup Bhuyan, the Supreme Court imported the test of imminence laid down in the US decision Brandenburg vs. State of Ohio, which held that advocacy of violence as a means of accomplishing political or institutional reform will be illegal only if it incites imminent lawless action.
In State of Kerala v Raneef, the SC observed that one cannot be penalized for merely belonging to an unlawful organization if there is no active participation. The prosecution in that case had argued that the accused was in possession of literature of ‘Jihad’. Recently, a division bench of the High Court of Kerala upheld the compensation of Rs 10 lakhs ordered by a single bench to a man who was illegally arrested on ground of possessing Maoist literature.
While granting bail to human rights activist Dr Binayak Sen in a UAPA case, the Supreme Court observed that mere possession of Maoist literature will not make one a criminal.
In this context, it is pertinent to recall the words of Justice Chinnappa Reddy in the case State of Madhya Pradesh v Ramashankar Raghuvanshi (1983), which set aside the government’s decision to dismiss a teacher on the ground that he was associated with RSS and Jan Sangh in past.
Holding that a person cannot be denied public employment on grounds of his political beliefs, Justice Reddy held :
“India is not a police state. India Is a democratic republic. More than 30 years ago, on January 26, 1950, the people of India resolved to constitute India into a democratic republic and to secure to all its citizens “Liberty of thought, expression, belief, faith and worship; Equality of status and opportunity”, and to promote “Fraternity, assuring the dignity of the individual”. This determination of the people, let us hope, is not a forgotten chapter of history. The determination has been written into the articles of the Constitution in the shape of Fundamental Rights and they are what makes India a democratic republic and what marks India from authoritarian or police States.”
The Constitution places an individual as its basic unit and seeks to expand the horizons of one’s liberties, by placing limitations and burdens on the State, as explained by the SC in the Puttaswamy case.
The UAPA amendments with the intentions as stated by the Union Home Minister turn these decisions on their head.
In Joint Anti-Fascist Refugee Committee vs. McGrath Justice Douglas of the U.S. Supreme Court had observed :
“In days of great tension when feelings run high, it is a temptation to take shortcuts by borrowing from the totalitarian techniques of our opponents. But when we do, we set in motion a subversive influence of our own design that destroys us from within.”
This amendment is such a ‘short cut’, which serves the purpose of only feeding mob frenzy.

NIA Amendment
– Divyank Yadav
.
During the recent passage of National Investigative Agency (Amendment) Bill, 2019 in Lok Sabha, Home Minister Amit Shah, while refuting opposition claims over “misuse” of law ,asserted that the Modi government will never misuse it on the basis of religion but ensure that terrorism is finished off irrespective of the religion of the accused[ii].
This claim of the Home Minister may not be reflective of ground realities, when one takes into account the history of use of anti-terror laws against innocent citizens.
Indians being subservient to the draconian law during British Raj was a norm. This hasn’t changed much after independence. TADA[iii] (elapsed) and POTA[iv] (now repealed) enacted after India gained independence, by Indian legislators, were draconian in a way as they were used effectively by state agents to abuse personal liberty and Fundamental Rights. Take for instance, Section 17(4) of TADA, which stated “â¦nothing in Section 438 of the Code shall apply in relation to any case involving the arrest of any person on an accusation of having committed an offence punishable under the provisions of this Actâ¦”. The provisions of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (for short “the UAPA Act”), namely under Section 43D(4) and 43D(5) are similar to the aforesaid Sections 17(4) and 17(5) of the TADA Act.
Similarly, the provisions of Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act, 1999 (for short “MCOC Act”), namely, Sections 21(3) and 21(4) are identical in terms. According to one political analyst, these laws are regurgitated versions of one another[v]. There have been examples when Supreme Court has invalidated a law and Parliament has enacted another law, with more harsher provisions than previous one or Indian government has repealed one law and fortify it with yet another law, more draconian and heinous than its predecessor[vi]; The repealing of POTA in 2004, in this sense, was just an eyewash as most of its provision were added to UAPA act[vii] by amending it in 2008.
Innocents made scapegoats
The Fundamental Rights are all parts of an integrated scheme and their waters must mix to constitute grand flow of impartial justice. Legislation should not invade the rights and should not smack of arbitrariness. The restriction of law should be rational and connected to the purpose for which it is necessary[viii]. Needless to say, laws which abridge fundamental rights and personal liberty of human on mere suspicion of crime are worst form of law. Personal liberty is a very precious fundamental right and it should be curtailed only when it becomes imperative according to the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case[ix].Arrest and detention in police lock-up of a person can cause incalculable harm to the reputation and self-esteem of a person[x].
National Police Commission in its third report mentioned power of arrest as one of the chief sources of corruption in the police, in India. The report suggested that, nearly 60% of the arrests were either unnecessary or unjustified and that such unjustified police arrests and action accounted for 43.2% of the expenditure of the jails[xi]. The Law Commission of India on many occasions has severely criticized the police for the arbitrary use of power of arrest. Arrest brings humiliation, curtails freedom and cast scars forever. Lawmakers know it so also the police. It has become a handy tool to the police officers who lack sensitivity or act with oblique motive[xii]. A wrongful arrest violates Article 21 of the constitution; the victim of arrest is entitled to compensation[xiii].Although, compensation can be granted for wrongful arrest but no compensation can justify the loss of dignity or the hardships one has endured in jail due to wrongful arrest.
Most misused provision
There have been instances of tribals being branded as Maoists and arrested by police for the only crime of trying to protect their area from exploitation and mining. Out of 39% of population of SC, ST and minorities in India, 53% of them are behind bars and most of them have been convicted under UAPA act[xiv].
Subsection 2(o) (iii) of UAPA Act that was added by an amended act of 2004 is in itself very vague as it makes any action a crime if it causes ‘Disaffection against India’. This has been effectively used by government, in lieu of national security, to suppress the critiques it fears. If a person is charged under UAPA, then even the court cannot exercise its power, to order or to direct the officer in charge of a prison to produce the detained person in court for inquiry, trial, answering to a charge or any other such proceedings, as UAPA specifies that S. 268 of the Cr.P.C. applies to every offence under the act. Accused charged under the UAPA can be denied all access to the court! Under UAPA police have 180 days instead of 90 to file a charge-sheet and it also doubles the time of one being remanded to police custody of up to 30 days and increases the duration of judicial custody to 90 days as well. The provisions of this law reminds of George Orwell’s ‘1984’.
The fortification of NIA (amendment) bill, is no more than an act of bamboozle. The atrocities committed on Dalits, Tribals and minorities by state machinery outweigh the atrocities committed by government on any other individual .It is appalling to note that majority of those who charged under anti-terror laws are the people belonging to SC, ST and minority communities.
Dalit activist, Angela Sontakke was arrested on 24 April 2011 by the Maharashtra ATS for allegedly having links with Maoists. For police, mere possession of maoist literature was enough for her conviction under UAPA act. Six others arrest of dalits followed within days of Angela’s arrest. Sushma Hemant Ramteke, 27 years, was arrested for the only offence of sharing rented accommodation with Angela. Anuradha Sonule and Mayuri Bhagat (Jenny), both 23 years of age, were found in possession of Maoist literature, and were thus arrested as they too have been accused of being members of the CPI (Maoist). Manoj Sonule was arrested in 2008 along with Arun Ferreira (human rights activist) and eight others on charges of being an alleged naxalite. (All the accused, including Manoj and Arun, were later acquitted in September 2017 as none of the charges could be proved against them).Even though, Supreme Court in the case of Arup Bhuyan[xv] ruled that, “Mere membership of a banned organization will not make a person a criminal unless he resorts to violence or incites people to violence or creates public disorder by violence or incitement to violence”.
In another case of Chatradhar Mahto, a peasant-Tribal leader from Lalpur (West Bengal) who was also the spokesperson the Peoples Committee against Police Atrocities (PCPA) was arrested in 2009 and was charged under UAPA Act. Twenty cases including those of keeping arms, exploding land mines, waging war and riotous assembly were registered against him. He was granted bail since Police could not prove any charge against him, but is not being released from the jail because of pending UAPA charges against him. Ranjit Murmu, who was arrested along with Chatradhar Mahto, died in police custody on 24th September 2011.
In April 2008, Jiten Marandi, a cultural activist of Jharkhand was arrested and charged under UAPA for Chilkhara massacre, a crime which he never committed. The police filed a charge-sheet and used three stock witnesses to get him convicted. The Sessions court awarded him death penalty but it was Jharkhand High Court which reversed the order and dropped all charges under UAPA against him.
Swapan Dasgupta, the editor-publisher of the Bengali version of People’s March was arrested in February 2010 and was charged under UAPA on the ground that his magazine was an organ of banned CPI (Maoist) party and thus is accused of waging war against India. He died on 2nd February 2010 under the custody of West Bengal Police. However, one of the peculiar fact here to mention is that the magazine was registered under Govt. of India and was never outlawed or banned.
On 28th of August 2018, Arun Ferreira and Vernon Gonsalves were again arrested along with Gautam Navlakha (civil liberties activist), Sudha Bhardwaj (trade union activist) and Varavara Rao (telugu poet) for their alleged links to Communist Part of India â Maoist[xvi].However, one curious fact here to take note of is that, Maharashtra police was unable to explain the specific offence for detaining Gautam Navlakha[xvii].
In a similar fashion, on 6th of June 2018, police arrested 5 activists namely Dr Soma Sen, Surendra Gadling, Mahesh Raut, Sudhir Dhawale and Rona Wilson on the ground of their alleged links with Maoists and charged them under UAPA along with other provision of IPC, for their financial contribution in organizing ‘Elgar Parishad’ (an event culminated into Koregaon-Bhima riots) to commemorate the contribution of Dalits in the Koregaon-Bhima battle fought on January 1,1818; When the dalits gathered for commemoration, Right-Wing activists led by Hindutva leaders Milind Ekbote and Shambhaji Bhide allegedly attacked them, which led into the incitement of Koregaon-Bhima riots on January 1, 2018[xviii]. Post-violence an F.I.R was filed on 3rdof January 2018 against Milind Ekbote and Shambhaji Bhide for inciting violence. The police, has totally abandoned this line of enquiry despite a number of evidences. Instead, they are following up on an F.I.R. filed on 8 January, 2018 claiming that the violence was made against the speeches made by the members of Elgar Parishad[xix]. However, later as the plot started to thicken, police started claiming that, these 5 members were part of Naxal operation and a letter was found from their possession in which they were planning a ‘Rajiv Gandhi type assassination’ of PM Modi.
Two former IPS officers with experience in probing cases related to anti-insurgency operations and extra-judicial killings have contested the police’s claims of a Maoist plot. Former Jharkhand director-general of police G.S. Rath, who dealt mainly with intelligence on Maoists from 2000 to 2013, said that[xx], “In my career, I never came across Maoists using original names in communications. They stuck to aliases. They use hand-written notes only for political propaganda…. The threat of killing the PM may be an individual opinion of a member but it would have to be cleared by the politburo.”
Former Gujarat additional DGP (intelligence), R.B. Sreekumar, who had testified before several probes into extra-judicial killings and the Gujarat riots, said[xxi] that, “These letters seem to be planted. Maoists never use real names. In Gujarat some 22 alleged terrorists, including Ishrat Jahan, were killed in fake encounters that were investigated by the Justice Bedi Commission. In every other case the police would say that they (the accused) were Lashkar-e-Toiba or Hizbul Mujahideen (operatives) and that they were trying to kill then CM (Narendra) Modi.”
Of the five arrested, Gadling spent his legal career fighting for those arrested under TADA and UAPA; Dhawale, a dalit activist and editor of ‘Vidrohi’ magazine, earlier spent his three years in jail on Naxalism charges and was acquitted latter of all charges; Raut, is an anti-mines activist, and led various campaign against mining activities; Shoma Sen is an English professor whose husband was earlier arrested for Naxal links and latter acquitted and Wilson is a Public relations Secretary for the Release of Political Prisoners.
There have been also various cases in which Dalit activists or members belonging to tribal communities when demanding their rights or fighting for their rights in a lawful manner have been dealt with iron hand by the government and have been implicated under false charges so as either to save the police from the pain of further investigation or to prove their faithfulness towards their leader, resulting in custodial tortures or deaths to obtain their confession. Take for instance, Indian government harassment of persons belonging to Dongria Kondh tribe of Odisha, a tribe which protested against Vedanta’s mining operation, a project which endangered their lands at the foot of Niyamgiri hills. One of the leaders of protest, Dodi Pusika’s daughter-in law was arrested and in exchange for her release whole family including Dodi Posika was made to ‘surrender’ as Maoist and paraded in front of whole media. Another example is of Soni Sori, a tribal teacher who was arrested for Maoist connection and was cold-bloodly tortured in the police custody and was subsequently released after many national and international campaigns[xxii] Even though there is a remedy available for bail if the charges are not proved against a convict in frivolous cases, but there is no remedy available to restore his honour.
The story of Wahid Shaikh here is worth mentioning as he was arrested in 2006 and charged under UAPA for 2006 Mumbai Blasts case. He was reportedly subjected to various tortures (one of the dreaded torture was of forcing him into a narrow space between two rooms) to sign his confession and lived almost 7 out of 9 years in solitary confinement. He was acquitted of all charges in 2015. “Maine nau saal main is nizam se faith kho diya (I have lost faith in the government and the courts)” said Wahid[xxiii], after acquittal.
At last, these lines by Edmund Burke stand relevant in contemporary Indian times, “People crushed by laws, have no hopes but from power. If the laws are their enemies, they will be enemies to the law; and those who have much to hope and nothing to lose will always be dangerous.”

Why NOT Death Sentence to other Criminals ? Judges ? Police ?

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA ORIGINAL JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. OF 2015
IN THE MATTER OF
NAGARAJA . M.R

editor SOS e Clarion of Dalit & SOS e Voice for Justice
# LIG 2 , No 761 ,, HUDCO First Stage , Laxmikantanagar ,
Hebbal , Mysore – 570017 , Karnataka State
.
….Petitioner

Versus

Honourable Chief Justice of India & Others
….Respondents

PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 12 to ARTICLE 35 & ARTICLE 51A OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS UNDER ARTICLE 32 & ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA.
To ,
Hon’ble The Chief Justice of India and His Lordship’s Companion
Justices of the Supreme Court of India. The Humble petition of the
Petitioner above named.

MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH :
1. Facts of the case:
“Power will go to the hands of rascals, , rogues and freebooters. All Indian leaders will be of low calibre and men of straw. They will have sweet tongues and silly hearts. They will fight among themselves for
power and will be lost in political squabbles . A day would come when even air & water will be taxed.” Sir Winston made this statement in the House of Commons just before the independence of India & Pakistan. Sadly , the forewarning of Late Winston Churchill has been proved right by some of our criminal , corrupt public servants.
We have utmost heartfelt respects to honest few in judiciary , police & public service. We SALUTE them. Our effort here is to bring errant judges , police & public servants to book.
Democracy is relatively best form of governance, compared to monarchy , communism , dictatorship. The founding pillar of democracy is honesty & integrity of public servants. When criminals become public servants , indulges in corrupt , criminal practices democracy fails. Such corrupt public servants , corrupt judges , corrupt police are inside enemies , traitors and cause more damage to national security than terrorists , naxalites or enemy armies. Which court dares to hang such corrupt judges , corrupt police ?
A. Terrorism is an inhuman act ,terrorists are inhumans , beasts , don’t deserve humane treatment. Those causing terror , aiding , abetting terror don’t deserve humane treatment. One among those terrorists yakub memmon responsible for Bombay bomb blast rightly deserved death sentence.
B. Dhananjay chatterjee killed an innocent little girl. He too rightly deserved death sentence.

Law Regarding death sentence is right , problem lies in it’s interpretation & enforcement . some of our corrupt judges , corrupt police , public servants have biased view. In india , legal system can be manipulated , evidences concocted , witnesses coerced , false confessions taken under third degree torture methods , judgement / match fixing is done. Read full details with actual cases …… A – Z of Manipulation of Indian Legal System
http://www.scribd.com/doc/187575206/A-Z-of-Manipulation-of-India-Legal-System ,
http://www.scribd.com/doc/173854541/Chief-Justice-of-India-A-Criminal ,
There is every possibility of innocent persons belonging to weaker , vulnerable sections of society , who cann’t defend themselves getting irreversible death sentence. Even if a death sentence is proved to be wrong afterwards , judges cann’t bring them back to life. Judges are NOT Gods. That is why , Judges please don’t play GOD. Please go through following actual cases fit for death sentences , but with biased view & under the patronage of powers that be escaped gallows.
2. Question(s) of Law:
Why death sentence to few , while not for others even though they deserve it ? Why there is a bias in awarding death sentence ?
3. Grounds:
Requests for right , unbiased prosecution , equitable justice for all.
4. Averment:

A. What action against dawood Ibrahim & tiger memmon ? what action against ministers , police , film personalities who have ties with dawood & attended parties hosted by dawood @ gulf ? why no action against them ? why no action against persons storing arms , ammunition for Bombay blasts ? why tada charges were diluted for some influential criminals ? biased law enforcement.
B. Why not death sentence to those responsible for burning Sabarmati express train passengers ? biased law enforcement.
C. Why not death sentence for those master minds & tools responsible for godhra riots ? why not gujarath state government appealed to higher court seeking death sentence to perpetrators of godhra riots ? biased law enforcement.
D. Why not death sentence to those responsible for murdering RTI activists , whistle blowers ? biased law enforcement.
E. Why not death sentence to those responsible for murdering whistle blowers satyendra dubey & IOCL Manjunath ? biased law enforcement.
F. Why not death sentence to those responsible for Bombay riots prior to Bombay bomb blasts ? in some cases state government , prosecution even withdrew cases against rioters , filed “B” reports closing the cases, in some cases prosecution failed to properly present witnesses , evidences before court and in some cases failed to appeal to higher courts. biased law enforcement.
G. Why not death sentence to those responsible for sikh massacre in delhi after assassination of PM Indira Gandhi ? in some cases state government , prosecution even withdrew cases against rioters , filed “B” reports closing the cases , in some cases prosecution failed to properly present witnesses , evidences before court and in some cases failed to appeal to higher courts.. biased law enforcement.
H. Why not death sentence to both master minds & tools of late PM Rajiv Gandhi assassination case ? biased law enforcement.
I. Why not death sentence to STF police personnel who ran a place called “workshop” in MM Hills , Karnataka. STF Police personnel during operation to nab forest brigand veerappan applied very cruel, inhuman 3rd degree torture methods on tribals , innocents to extract false confessions at this place called workshop. Some innocents died unable to bear the torture by police. This cruel act was proved before statutorily constituted human rights commission judge , still no death sentence to STF Police personnel , why ? biased law enforcement.
J. Why not death sentence to police officials responsible for cold blooded murders , fake encounters , lock up deaths , third degree torture of innocents ? biased law enforcement. Refer TORTURE CHAMBERS OF INDA……https://sites.google.com/site/sosevoiceforjustice/third-degree-torture-of-chief-justice-of-india-karnataka-dgp-union-home-secretary , https://sites.google.com/site/eclarionofdalit/torture-chambers-of-india
K. Why not government pay compensation to civilian victims of terrorist acts , riots ? why don’t government pay appropriate respect , recognition , compensation to police , security , military personnel who lay down their lives in the line of duty guarding our motherland & our brethren ?
L. Why lenient punishment to approvers in some cases , but not to yakub memmon ? Yakub memmon helped prosecution in gathering evidences regarding Bombay bomb blast case , still no leniency by court , why ? biased law enforcement.
M. Why no action against corrupt , criminal judges & police who doesn’t do their duties , who doesn’t give information under RTI , who doesn’t admit , hear PIL appeals thereby protecting the crimianls ? biased law enforcement. Read NOTICE TO CJI http://www.scribd.com/doc/273722960/Wake-up-Chief-Justice-of-India , https://sites.google.com/site/eclarionofdalit/pil—notice-to-cji
N. Universal Law , Indian law proclaims terrorism , aiding & abetting terrorism a crime. Why does the Indian government agencies aids & abets counter terrorist groups in jammu Kashmir , north east states of india ? why state government & Indian government supports , aids SALWA JUDUM a counter terrorist , anti naxalite outfit which is jointly responsible for terrorism in chattisgarh state ? why tamilnadu state government & Indian government aided tamil terrorists in srilanka ? why Indian government is aiding terror outfits in afghanistan & Pakistan ? why indian government supported terrorists in east Pakistan , ultimately creating Pakistan ? all these dastardly , cruel acts of indian government has resulted in bloodshed , still resulting in loss of numerous innocent lives. Why don’t Indian government mind it’s own business ? india has enough domestic problems to solve , why don’t the government use tax payer’s money to solve domestic problems instead of interfering in other’s affairs resulting in bloodshed ? why NOT Death Sentence to prime minister of india & president of india at those times responsible for authorizing aid to terrorists ? biased law enforcement.
O. Late Mr.Warren Anderson was in control of Bhopal United Carbide plant , through internal safety checks & 3rd party audits he was privy to glaring safety lapses on part of union carbide management. Still he chose to keep mum , which resulted in Bhopal gas tragedy killing thousands of innocents , maiming lakhs of human beings & still even new born babies in the locality are contracting ailments. Courtesy Mr.Anderson. Such a butcher Anderson was arrested by local police under man slaughter charges , produced before court. However ministers , government officials of both state & central governments without orders , permission from the court illegally got him out of jail arranged a special car , special aeroplane for the culprit to escape from law. Years afterwards , a CJI of supreme court of india diluted the man slaughter charges against Mr.Anderson. Why no death sentence to Anderson responsible for death & sufferings of lakhs of people ? why no deth sentence to chief minister , minister , police , officials who helped Anderson escape from Indian law ? why no death sentence to CJI who diluted charges against Anderson ? biased law enforcement.

In the backdrop of above cases , the fact is our legal system is imperfect , error prone. Therefore , it must become professional , perfect in it’s duty first , to punish all the wrong doers. Till , such a time death penalty must be kept on hold or abolished. If it cann’t , at the least it can give choice of death to convicts like death by sleeping pill or injection or gun shot , etc instead of medieval hanging.

Hereby , I do request the honorable supreme court of India to consider this as a PIL for : “writ of Mandamus” and to issue instructions to the concerned public servants in the following cases to perform their duties & to answer the questions.
The Petitioner has sent many letters / appeals / petitions to supreme court of india & other courts through e-mail , DARPG website & through regular mail requesting them to consider those as PILs. But none ofthem were admitted , even acknowledgement for receipts were not given. See How duty conscious ,our judges are & see how our judges are sensitive towards life , liberty of citizens , common men & see how careless our judges are towards anti national crimes , crimes worth crores of rupees. That the present petitioner has not filed any other petition (which are admitted by courts) in any High Court or the Supreme Court of India on the subject matter of the present petition.

PRAYER:
In the above premises, it is prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased:
a . Hereby , I do request the honorable supreme court of India to consider this as a PIL for : “writ of Mandamus” and to issue instructions to the concerned public servants in the following cases to perform their duties & to answer the questions.
b . to pass such other orders and further orders as may be deemed necessary on the facts and in the circumstances of the case.
c . to abolish death penalty or to give choice of death to convicts.
d . To legally prosecute authorities of supreme court of india for not answering show cause notice issued to them and order them to answer the show cause notice as well as RTI questions given to them by the petitioner.
FOR WHICH ACT OF KINDNESS, THE PETITIONER SHALL BE DUTY BOUND, EVER PRAY.

Dated : 8th August 2015 ………………..FILED BY: NAGARAJA.M.R.

Place : Mysuru , India…………………….PETITIONER-IN-PERSON

Salutes to martyrs – CRPF personnel who sacrificed their lives in the line of duty @ Pulwama , J&K on 14.02.2019. Since decades many of our Military , Para military personnel have sacrificed their lives to protect us – citizens of india against attacks from external enemies , terrorists & Naxalites. We salute you Brave Jawans.
PIL – India , Pakistan , USA sponsoring TERRORISM
Double speak of Government

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA ORIGINAL JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. …….OF 2015

IN THE MATTER OF

NAGARAJA . M.R ,
editor , SOS e Clarion of Dalit & SOS e Voice for Justice ,

# LIG 2 , No 761 , HUDCO First Stage , Laxmikantanagar ,

Hebbal , Mysore – 570017 , Karnataka State

…..Petitioner

Versus

H.E.Honourable President of India & Others

….Respondents

PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 12 to ARTICLE 35 & ARTICLE 51A OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF

MANDAMUS UNDER ARTICLE 32 & ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA.

To ,

Hon’ble The Chief Justice of India and His Lordship’s Companion

Justices of the Supreme Court of India. The Humble petition of the Petitioner above named.

MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH :

1. Facts of the case:
Our whole hearted respects to honest few in judiciary , parliament & public service. Our salutes to them , due to honest efforts of those few noble persons only , at least democracy is surviving in India.

A . “Power will go to the hands of rascals, , rogues and freebooters. All Indian leaders will be of low calibre and men of straw. They will have sweet tongues and silly hearts. They will fight among themselves for power and will be lost in political squabbles . A day would come when even air & water will be taxed.” Sir Winston made this statement in the House of Commons just before the independence of India & Pakistan. Sadly , the forewarning of Late Winston Churchill has been proved right by some of our criminal , corrupt people’s representatives , police , public servants & Judges. Some of the below mentioned police , judges fall among the category of churchill’s men – Rogues , Rascals & Freebooters.
B . As per the preamble of the constitution of India all the people , all Indian citizens are equal in every respect , equally entitled to justice , equally responsible to uphold constitution . Only People , Citizens of India are supreme No Judges , No Ministers , No Police , No Military , etc are supreme. Judges , ministers , president , Police , Military etc are all public servants constitutionally mandated to SERVE the public , NOT to master over them. Even after 69 years of independence these police , judges , ministers have not come out of colonial hangover instead become worse treating general public as their servants.
C. Inequality in society , unjust laws , unjust enforcement of law is a breeding ground for frustrated youths , criminal elements , naxalites , terrorists. Vested foreign & domestic interests manipulate these inequalities in society to advance their vested selfish interests using these frustrated , disillusioned youths as pawns in their power game.
D. I will list below various types of inequities existing in present day india even after nearly 69 years of independence.
E. People of Jammu & Kashmir , North Eastern states of India are governed by different set of laws than the rest of india.
F. There are different set of property laws , succession laws , marriage laws , etc for people of different religions.
G. Judges committing crimes against women , indulging in corruption, etc can not be legally prosecuted & punished.
H. Even after 69 years of independence , still dalits , tribal people are suffering & backward.
I. Police & other law enforcement agencies use 3rd degree torture against people suspected of petty crimes , whereas they don’t use 3rd degree torture against their own corrupt colleagues , Judges who aid underworld dons , big criminals earning bribe money to the tune of lakhs , crores of rupees. In many cases of Police corruption , judicial corruption even legal prosecution is not at all done.
J. Whole MUSLIM community is painted as a terror & suspected world over. They don’t easily get jobs , rented houses , loans , etc everybody suspects them. True most of the terrorists come from muslim community , however there are also common folk like us in the muslim community who yearn for a honest , simple living. There are good people in all communities as there are bad people.
K. Anti Terror Laws like TADA , AFSPA , etc are used with impunity without reasoning even on old people , children and whoever questions the police , military for their actions. Ideally these laws should cover those aiding terrorists , anti nationals. However certain celebrities , police officials themselves who hobnob with terrorists , underworld and aid their terror activities are not covered by these terror laws.
L. Constitution of India has not authorized , given powers to anybody to use 3rd degree torture against suspects , it is illegal & inhuman. Police selectively use 3rd degree torture against suspects , innocents from poor , ordinary back grounds to extract false confessions. Whereas they don’t use 3rd degree torture against real time , big time rich & influential criminals instead they get many facilities in the jail.
M. Crime is a crime , whether big or small. There is discrimination in cell allotment , labour hours , provision of food , visitors facility between ordinary accused & rich accused persons , ordinary criminals and rich criminals within jail.
N. The police & Presiding Judge in the case are responsible for health , safety of persons both in their custody as well as safety of witnesses outside. Many persons are subjected to 3rd degree torture while in custody , some people have died in lock up and witnesses were threatened , murdered outside , but the respective police , judges are not legally prosecuted for murder charges.
O. The suspects who were acquitted of charges under anti terror laws & other criminal charges , who went through hell , whose family suffered , are not paid any compensation for wrongful detention by courts of law nor the police who were responsible for wrong detention are legally prosecuted for leveling false charges.
P. Tribal people who are inhabitants of forest , who are living in harmony with ecology , protecting forests since centuries are evicted by authorities in the name of protecting forests. Same authorities give vast tracts of forest land on platter to big multinational corporations , who in turn destroy ecology , environment.
Q. Dalits , backward class people when construct small temporary hutments on government land , those hutments are immediately razed down , dalits evicted by police , authorities. When rich crooks illegally encroach vast tracts of government lands , lakes , canals , build huge townships , business complexes earning crores of rupees , no action to raze down illegal buildings , evict encroachers is taken by police , authorities. Sadly , government is in process of enacting laws to legalize those illegal structures belonging to rich crooks.
R. Government of india to fight the proxy war of cunning , coward external enemies is indulging in the same cowardly tactics of aiding & abetting terrorism , by the way killing many innocent civilians. Instead GOI must give a befitting military reply to enemy.
S. GOI is responsible for creation , funding , training of SALWA JUDUM , to counter naxalism in india. GOI is responsible for creation , funding , training of counter terrorist out fits in north east india , jammu Kashmir , Pakistan and responsible for creation , funding , training of LTTE , Tamil terrorist outfits in srilanka. GOI poked it’s nose in the internal affairs of east Pakistan which led to creation of separate nation Bangladesh. All these led to loss of thousands of innocent lives , GOI didn’t bother to compensate them.
T. In india , we have many unattended domestic problems , half of our population is barely sustaining on a single piece meal a day. GOI instead of properly using the precious tax payer’s money to solve domestic problems , squandering them on funding terror outfits. No legal prosecution of GOI Ministers responsible for these terror acts taken till date.
U. Actions were taken with impunity against sikh terrorists but in the same way actions were not taken against those responsible for sikh massacre in delhi , else where.
V. Actions were taken with impunity against terrorists responsible for burning of Sabarmati express train were taken , but in the same way actions were not taken against those responsible for Godhra riots in Gujarath.
W. Actions were taken with impunity against terrorists responsible for Bombay bomb blasts were taken , but in the same way actions were not taken against those responsible for Bombay riots afterwards.
X. Many industrialists are contributing money to criminals , but no action by GOI to stop it taken till date.
Y. Government of Pakistan , china are aiding terrorists , separatists , Maoists in india. Government of USA is also indirectly aiding terrorists , separatists , Maoists in india through Pakistan.
Z. Whoever raises his voice against the illegalities of authorities are silenced in many ways by authorities. He will be fitted in fake cases , his livelihood snatched away , courts with weird interpretations of law will punish him , slap contempt charges on him sending him to jail. If he is spilling out more TRUTH he will be neutralized , murdered by intelligence agencies with the aid of criminals. Many whistle blowers , RTI Activists , Journalists , Human Rights Activists , Crusaders have died mysteriously this way. No compensation to victims , no legal prosecution of authorities responsible for it till date.
2. Question(s) of Law:

Are all Indian citizens really equal ? Are police , judges , ministers above law ?
3. Grounds:

Requests for equitable justice , free expression & protection to life & liberty. Transparency , accountability in functioning of police & Judiciary .

4. Averment:

GIVE WHAT ACTION HAS BEEN TAKEN AGAINST THE GUILTY JUDGES , POLICE , PUBLIC SERVANTS responsible for above mentioned injustices.
PRAYER:

In the above premises, it is prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased:

(i) Hereby , I do request the honorable supreme court of India to consider this as a PIL for : “writ of Mandamus” and to issue instructions to the concerned public servants in the following cases to perform their duties & to answer the questions.
(ii) Hereby , I do request the honourable supreme court of india to enforce uniform civil code for all Indian citizens.
(iii) Hereby , I do request the honourable supreme court of india to uphold the constitution of india and to protect the constitutional rights of all Indian citizens including mine.

(iv) Hereby , I do request the honourable supreme court of india to uphold the constitution of india , to protect the constitutional rights , human rights of all Indian citizens including mine and to enable , facilitate all Indian citizens to perform their Fundamental Duties as per constitution.
(v) Hereby , I do request the honourable supreme court of india to annul legal immunity privileges given to judges of india and make the judges accountable for all their actions.
(vi) Hereby , I do request the honourable supreme court of india to annul Article 370 of our constitution giving special status to jammu Kashmir state and also annul laws giving special status to north eastern states of india.
(vii) Hereby , I do request the honourable supreme court of india to initiate legal prosecution of police , law enforcement officials , judges responsible for 3rd degree torture of innocents , lock-up deaths , fake encounters and to pay compensation to victims and to recover money from personal properties of those guilty police , judges.
(viii) Hereby , I do request the honourable supreme court of india to order the jail authorities to stop classification of prisoners and to stop discrimination of prisoners.
(ix) Hereby , I do request the honourable supreme court of india to order police & presiding judge of a case to ensure protection of life of accused , witnesses in the case , complainant of the case.
(x) Hereby , I do request the honourable supreme court of india to order GOI & state governments to give reservation , other facilities to dalits , backward class people in turn. Then facilities will be available to wide section of dalits instead of a creamy , affluent dalit family repeatedly getting benefits for generations , while hundreds of dalit families don’t get benefit even once in their life time.
(xi) Hereby , I do request the honourble supreme court of india to order GOI & state governments to protect the forest rights of tribals over the forest they dwell in. To legally prosecute illegal encroachers of forest , rich crooks.
(xii) Hereby , I do request the honourable supreme court of india to annul the land acts enacted by various state governments which goes on to legalize illegal encroachment of government lands , lakes , canals , etc by rich crooks. To legally prosecute the illegal encroachers , rich crooks.
(x) Hereby , I do request the honourable supreme court of india to legally prosecute ministers , public servants of GOI & state governments who aided, abetted terrorism , who created SALWA JUDUM , who aided tamil terror outfits in srilanka , who created counter terror outfits in NEFA , J&K , Pakistan , who aided Bangladeshi separatists. To pay compensation to victims of those terrorism and to recover money from properties of guilty ministers , guilty public servants.
(xi) Hereby , I do request the honourble supreme court of india to order GOI & state governments to take impartial action against all the criminals responsible for terror acts , riots , bomb blasts irrespective of which party they belong to or which community they belong to or if he is a celebrity or ordinary person.
(xii) Hereby , I do request the honourble supreme court of india to order GOI to give a befitting military reply to enemies , crush the intruders , terrosists , naxalites but not to indulge in cowardly proxy war which kills innocent civilians.
(xiii) Hereby , I do request the honourble supreme court of india to order GOI & state governments to pay compensation to victims who were wrongly detained , jailed by police , authorities under anti terror laws , criminal laws. To recover money from properties , salary , pension of guilty police & judges.
(xiv) Hereby , I do request the honourble supreme court of india to order RBI , GOI & state governments to rigorously monitor transactions of commercial firms , industries for black money transactions and to keep a tab on auditors , company secretaries who aid those criminals. To make public details of guilty industrialists , to legally prosecute them and to recover money siphoned off from them.
(xv) Hereby , I do request the honourble supreme court of india to pass such other orders and further orders as may be deemed necessary on the facts and in the circumstances of the case to remove inequalities prevailing in our law , in law enforcement & in our society as mentioned above. By which, causes of origin for naxalism , terrorism can be erased.
(xvi) Hereby , I do request the honourble supreme court of india to declare Pakistan , china & USA as terror states and order GOI to deal accordingly with those nations and to make an appeal to UNITED NATIONS , INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE to take action against Pakistan , china & USA for their terror crimes in india.
(xvii) to pass such other orders and further orders as may be deemed necessary on the facts and in the circumstances of the case.
FOR WHICH ACT OF KINDNESS, THE PETITIONER SHALL BE DUTY BOUND, EVER PRAY.

Date : 23rd January 2016………………………………Filed By : Nagaraja.M.R.

Place : Mysuru India…………………………………… Petitioner in person
O’ JIHADIS , FREEDOM FIGHTERS , TERRORISTS & NAXALITES
– Introspect yourself

Kashmiri militants claim they are fighting for kashmiris, when the very same kashmiris were suffering from loses due to earthquake why didn’t the so-called jihadis didn’t make any relief efforts? Why didn’t their foreign master – Pakistan didn’t make any relief efforts? Within the pak occupied Kashmir ( pok) itself, Pakistan didn’t make appropriate relief efforts. It is government of India & international community who provided proper & timely relief.
The foreign powers are not at all interested in your well being. They are ready to spend millions of dollars for aiding terrorism, but not ready to spend a few hundreds for your education , health care or self employment schemes through NGOs. The fact is they don’t want your well being, they don’t want you to prosper, live peacefully. The ultimate objective of these foreign powers is to take you on the path of self destruction, destruction of your motherland & to finally usurp the power, to subjugate you into slavery in turn looting the resources of your country.
Ofcourse, in India there is rampant corruption. Still democracy is live & kicking in India, it is the best form of governance. You have got real examples of countries in Africa, latin America, wherein the countries have secured independence through separatist / terrorist movements. The terrorist leaders themselves have become prime minister / president of newly independent countries. Now, they are more corrupt & barbaric than their predecessors . even after getting independence, the lives of commonfolk has become bad to worse. By independence , only leaders have benefited. Will you lead another struggle ? this is endless, as the selfishness , greed of leaders knows no bounds.
In the past, government of India aided tamil separatists, Pakistan terrorists, etc, butchering innocents. The government of U.S.A aided terrorists in Africa, afghanisthan, latin America , murdering innocents. Various countries have aided terrorism while preaching peace. These barbaric acts were motivated by selfish, corrupt, ego-centric leaders. Now, in the bomeerang effects of their actions, innocents are dying in bomb blasts, etc.
Violence breds violence. Peace & compassion results in all round harmony, prosperity. Every human being must struggle against injustices in a peaceful & legal manner. The struggle must be against the corrupt system, for that peaceful struggle democracy is the best forum. Don’t be pawns in the hands of foreign powers, politicians. They are not at all interested in your welfare, well being. At the end, it is the leaders who become ministers & amass wealth through corruption. The common folk like you will remain as fiddlings, minions forever.
Just imagine yourselves in the place of victims of delhi serial bomb blasts (29/10/2005) or Mumbai blasts of 26/11/08 . just imagine the plight of little child MOSHE who has lost both his parents , imagine Your mother & wife are crying, your children are dead , your father’s hands & limbs are ripped apart in the blast. How does it feel to be one ? no religion, no god asks it’s followers to cause destruction. All religions, gods are full of eternal love & compassion. Let that god shine his light, upon you all on the violent path.

Whether it is in india or else where , democratic system is best form of governance. The people in those countries suffer due to corrupt public servants . in all such cases , the legal , non violent fight must be against the corrupt people , corrupt police , corrupt judges , CORRUPT public servants but not against the system itself.

Let us build ram rajya of mahatma’s dream through non violent means within the existing democratic framework . Jai Hind. Vande Mataram.

Your’s sincerely,
Nagaraj.M.R.
Sri Lanka blames India for Tamil separatist war
Updated: Apr 10, 2013 18:59 IST

Colombo: Sri Lanka Wednesday blamed India for the Tamil separatist war which dragged for 30 years on the island.
The information department quoted Defence Secretary Gotabhaya Rajapaksa as telling the local media that India could never absolve itself of the responsibility for creating terrorism in Sri Lanka.
India’s former permanent representative to the UN, Hardeep Singh Puri, called for an investigation into specific allegations of war crimes during the last 100 days of military operations in Sri Lanka.
Rajapaksa, however, said those demanding accountability on Sri Lanka’s part for alleged atrocities committed during the last 100 days of the conflict were silent on the origin of terrorism in Sri Lanka.
He said Puri should realise that India’s intervention in Sri Lanka had caused a major regional crisis when “Indian-trained Sri Lankan terrorists” raided the Maldives in November 1988.
Rajapaksa said the international community should consider a comprehensive investigation into the issue beginning with the Indian intervention.
The information department quoted the defence secretary as saying that some interested parties were reluctant to acknowledge that Sri Lanka was a much better place today without the Tamil Tigers.
The Sri Lankan military defeated the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) in May 2009 after 30 years of war.

According to the South Asia Terrorism Portal, more than 20,000 civilians have been killed in attacks by armed groups in Pakistan between 2003 and 2015. And the December 16 attack on the school in Peshawar wasn’t the first to target schoolchildren.Dec 16, 2015
The Sri Lankan Civil War was an armed conflict fought on the island of Sri Lanka. Beginning on 23 July 1983, there was an intermittent insurgency against the government by the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (the LTTE, also known as the Tamil Tigers), which fought to create an independent Tamil state called Tamil Eelam in the north and the east of the island. After a 26-year military campaign, the Sri Lankan military defeated the Tamil Tigers in May 2009, bringing the civil war to an end.[1]
For over 25 years, the war caused significant hardships for the population, environment and the economy of the country, with an initial estimated 80,000–100,000 people killed during its course.

PIL Before Supreme Court of USA

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF USA ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. OF 2016

IN THE MATTER OF
NAGARAJA . M.R ,
editor , SOS e Clarion of Dalit & SOS e Voice for Justice ,
# LIG 2 , No 761 , HUDCO First Stage , Laxmikantanagar ,
Hebbal , Mysore – 570017 , Karnataka State , India and Global American Citizens
…..Petitioners

Versus

H.E.Honourable President of USA & Others
….Respondents

Petition under BILL OF RIGHTS and Human Rights Charter
To ,
Hon’ble The Chief Justice of USA and His Lordship’s Companion Justices of the United States of America

The Humble petition of the Petitioner above named.
MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH :
1. Facts of the case:
a. Inequality in society , unjust laws , unjust enforcement of law is a breeding ground for frustrated youths , criminal elements , naxalites , terrorists. Vested foreign & domestic interests manipulate these inequalities in society to advance their vested selfish interests using these frustrated , disillusioned youths as pawns in their power game.
b. Police & other law enforcement agencies use 3rd degree torture against people suspected of petty crimes , whereas they don’t use 3rd degree torture against their own corrupt colleagues , Judges who aid underworld dons , big criminals earning bribe money to the tune of Millions of dollars. In many cases of Police corruption , judicial corruption even legal prosecution is not at all done.
c. Whole MUSLIM community is painted as a terror & suspected world over. They don’t easily get jobs , rented houses , loans , etc everybody suspects them. If you go by numbers there are many Christian terrorists in spain , Nicaragua , cuba , Ireland , etc and most importantly masterminds of terrorism , people who sowed the seeds of terrorism in Middle East , Asia , else where are all CHRISTIANS. Does that mean all Christians are terrorists. True most of the terrorists come from muslim community , however there are also common folk like us in the muslim community who yearn for a honest , simple living. There are good people in all communities as there are bad people.
d. Crime is a crime , whether big or small. There is discrimination in cell allotment , labour hours , provision of food , visitors facility between ordinary accused & rich accused persons , ordinary criminals and rich criminals within jail.
e. The police & Presiding Judge in the case are responsible for health , safety of persons both in their custody as well as safety of witnesses outside. Many persons are subjected to 3rd degree torture while in custody , some people have died in lock up and witnesses were threatened , murdered outside , but the respective police , judges are not legally prosecuted for murder charges.
f. The suspects who were acquitted of charges under anti terror laws & other criminal charges , who went through hell , whose family suffered , are not paid any compensation for wrongful detention by courts of law nor the police who were responsible for wrong detention are legally prosecuted for leveling false charges.
g. US Presidents and US government in league with US based MNCs successively poked it’s nose in the affairs of other sovereign nations , created rift in the peaceful countries , sowed the seeds of terrorism , aided & supported terrorists in all respects. US is a heartless butcher , but now preaching non violence , peace to the world.
h. US government always practices double standards take for instance industrial accident done by BP oil off US coast , US Government extracted compensation to the maximum extent. Where as US based MNC Union carbide (now DOW Chemicals) did man slaughter in india at Bhopal , still US government is not ordering the guilty company to pay compensation.
i. USA which is a hugely industrialized nation with population enjoying opulent life style has caused more damage to the environment resulting in climate change. As the worst destroyer of ecology , US government is bound is bound to pay more for the repair of environment. However US government is forcing other backward countries to share it’s own burden.

2. Question(s) of Law:
Are Presidents of United States of America above Law ? Are US police , judges , other public servants above law ?
What Legal Rights Presiden of USA , US Military , US Police & US Judges have to successively violate the human rights of citizens of other countries both within USA & outside.
how much US resources were spent from US TREASURY , to finance terrorist outfits , military juntas in other sovereign nations ?
is not Al-queda , Taliban creations of USA ?
did September 9 / 11 WTC attack truly happened by hijacked airplane or was it planned by US authorities ? see
http://www.neiu.edu/~ayjamess/hmmm.htm#Main
is racial profiling , profiling a particular community & suspecting all the muslims as terror suspects , right?
if it is right , the creators of such terrorist outfits – past presidents of USA – who were Christians makes it logical to assume whole of our Christian community as terror suspect ?
is not use of 3rd degree torture on all type of suspects in US prisons & in the prisons of US allied countries at the behest of US authorities , right ? is it not violation of human rights & US laws ?
did US find any weapons of mass destruction in Iraq , which was the main reason for US attacking Iraq ?
why not US authorities use scientific interrogation techniques like polygraph , lie detector tests instead of inhuman 3rd degree torture on terror suspects & suspects in other criminal cases ?
what legal right our President of USA have , to illegally spend billions of our dollars on inhuman , illegal acts of terrorism , military coup , creation , aiding & abetting of terrorists , etc , in other sovereign nations ? while we are suffering from loss of jobs ,loss of home due to natural calamities , etc ?
Inspite of repeated appeals for justice JUDGES of SUPREME COURT of USA are mum and not taking action against terror presidents. Is it because they owe their elevation to the highest judicial post to the US president or is it a survival act ?
Crux , Foundation of all religions is humanity , kindness & universal brotherhood. It is the preachers who misrepresent it. Terrorism created , aided , abetted by anybody is inhuman & wrong . Terrorism is creation of power hungry , selfish people & they must be legally punished .
Hereby , we appeal to the honorable supreme court of USA to legally prosecute Previous PRESIDENTS OF USA in the last 4 decades , for crimes of terror , as per the present US anti-terror laws.

3. Grounds:
Requests for equitable justice , free expression & protection to life & liberty of all American citizens as per BILL of RIGHTS. Transparency , accountability in functioning of US President , US police & US Judiciary .

4. Averment:
GIVE WHAT ACTION HAS BEEN TAKEN AGAINST THE GUILTY US Presidents US JUDGES , US POLICE , US PUBLIC SERVANTS responsible for TERROR Crimes committed in USA & Outside USA with support from US government.

PRAYER:
In the above premises, it is prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased:
Hereby , I do request the honorable supreme court of USA to consider this as a PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION for : “writ of Mandamus” and to issue instructions to the concerned public servants in the following cases to perform their duties & to answer the questions.
Hereby , I do request the honourable supreme court of USA to uphold the constitution of USA and to protect the constitutional rights of all American citizens.
Hereby , I do request the honourable supreme court of USA to legally prosecute pas presidents of USA and Incumbent President of Government of United States of America for Terror Crimes , torture of innocents in Guantanamo , renditions , etc.
Hereby , I do request the honourable supreme court of USA to initiate legal prosecution of police , law enforcement officials , judges responsible for 3rd degree torture of innocents , lock-up deaths , fake encounters and to pay compensation to victims and to recover money from personal properties of those guilty police , judges.
Hereby , I do request the honourable supreme court of USA to order the jail authorities to stop classification of prisoners and to stop discrimination of prisoners.
Hereby , I do request the honourable supreme court of USA to order police & presiding judge of a case to ensure protection of life of accused , witnesses in the case , complainant of the case.
Hereby , I do request the honourable supreme court of USA to order DOW Chemicals to pay full compensation to victims of Bhopal Gas Tragedy in India and initiate criminal prosecution of responsible company executives.
Hereby , I do request the honourable supreme court of USA to order government of USA to pay towards the damages it has done to the environment.
Hereby , I do request the honourable supreme court of USA to order government of USA to spend tax payer’s money on food safety , health care , joblessness of American citizens than on sponsoring terrorism in other countries.
to pass such other orders and further orders as may be deemed necessary on the facts and in the circumstances of the case.

FOR WHICH ACT OF KINDNESS, THE PETITIONER SHALL BE DUTY BOUND, EVER PRAY.

Date : 31st January 2016………………………………Filed By : Nagaraja.M.R.
Place : Mysuru India…………………………………… Petitioner in person

“THE GREATEST PURVEYOR OF VIOLENCE IN THE WORLD TODAY IS MY GOVERNMENT”
-Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King jr.
“The greatest crime since World War II has been U.S. foreign policy.”
-Former US Attorney General Ramsey Clark
“America must prosecute its own war criminals”

AN APPEAL TO THE HONOURABLE CHIEF JUSTICE OF SUPREME COURT OF USA , CHIEF JUSTICE OF INDIA & CHIEF JUSTICE OF PAKISTAN
– By American Citizens

Our country was known as ” Heaven On Earth” , “Land of Equality & Equal Oppurtunity” & the “Statue of Liberty” rightly symbolized the spirit of our country. Now USA is known as a “Terror State”.
In the last 3 – 4 decades , the persons who occupied the office of President USA ,in their individual capacity took wrong , inhuman decisions , meddled in the internal affairs of other sovereign nations , spent our resources to create terrorist outfits like al-queda , Taliban in those countries.
In turn these terrorist outfits terrorized , murdered millions of innocents & this Frankenstein monster came home to roost on September 9 / 11 . After September 9 / 11 , each terror suspect is severely tortured in hell like Abu Garibh prison , elsewhere by our authorities. For argument sake let us accept
that these terrorists who murder innocents don’t deserve kid glove treatment & rightly deserve 3rd degree torture. When a single terrorist deserve such inhuman 3rd degree torture , what quantum of punishment , torture – previous presidents of USA deserve – who created , aided & abetted thousands of such terrorists , terrorist outfits ?
Herby, we appeal to the honourable Supreme Court of USA to order the federal government to to make public :
1. how much US resources were spent from US TREASURY , to finance terrorist outfits , military juntas in other sovereign nations ?
2. is not Al-queda , Taliban creations of USA ?
3. did September 9 / 11 WTC attack truly happened by hijacked airplane or was it planned by US authorities ? see
http://www.neiu.edu/~ayjamess/hmmm.htm#Main
4 . is racial profiling , profiling a particular community & suspecting all the muslims as terror suspects , right?
5. if it is right , the cretors of such terrorist outfits – past presidents of USA – who were Christians makes it logical to assume whole of our Christian community as terror suspect ?
6. is not use of 3rd degree torture on all type of suspects in US prisons & in the prisons of US allied countries at the behest of US authorities , right ? is it not violation of human rights & US laws ?
7. did US find any weapons of mass destruction in Iraq , which was the main reason for US attacking Iraq ?
8. why not US authorities use scientific interrogation techniques like polygraph , lie detector tests instead of inhuman 3rd degree torture on terror suspects & suspects in other criminal cases ?
9 . what legal right our President of USA have , to illegally spend billions of our dollars on inhuman , llegal acts of terrorism , military coup , creation , aiding & abetting of terrorists , etc , in other sovereign nations ? while we are suffering from loss of jobs ,loss of home due to natural calamities , etc ?
Crux , Foundation of all religions is humanity , kindness & universal brotherhood. It is the preachers who misrepresent it. Terrorism created , aided , abetted by anybody is inhuman & wrong . Terrorism is creation of power hungry , selfish people & they must be legally punished .
Hereby , we appeal to the honorable supreme court of USA to legally prosecute Previous PRESIDENTS OF USA in the last 4 decades , for crimes of terror , as per the present US anti-terror laws.
Recently , in the issue of weekly publication “The Week” , cabinet minister of government of srilanka (previously a deadly terrorist & right hand man of LTTE chief Prabhakaran ) Mr. Karuna , Himself has stated in an interview that LTTE received arms training in Tamilnadu State of India , to wage war against Government of Srilanka. The Justice Jain Commission Of Enquiry , which probed late PM Rajiv Gandhi’s assassination case , also stated that Tamil Terrorist outfits in Srilanka Received monetary , financial , arms training support from government of India. GOI has even setup a radio station for tamil terrorists of srilanka , within Indian territory. GOI spent billions of dollars of Indian taxpayer’s money for aiding & abetting terrorism , while billions of Indians were half starving & going without a single meal , without proper health care.
Recently , in a media interview the president of Government of Pakistan Mr. Jardari himself has confessed that in the previous years the government of Pakistan has aided & abetted Terrorism for tactical gains of Pakistan , spending billions of dollars of Pakistani taxpayer’s money. While ordinary Pakistanis were suffering from starvation , lack of health care , etc.
All the above proves that Previous Presidents of Government of USA , previous Presidents of Government of Pakistan & Previous Prime Ministers of Government of India were the real master minds of TERRORISM , founded , aided , abetted TERRORISM FOR THEIR OWN SELFISH GAINS. In turn Murdering lakhs of innocent human beings. These guilty previous presidents & prime ministers are deadly than OSAMA BIN LADEN.
Hereby , we appeal to the Honorable Chief Justices of supreme courts of USA , INDIA , PAKISTAN , BANGLADESH , SRILANKA & INTERNATIONAL WAR CRIMES TRIBUNAL , to legally prosecute the previous Prime Ministers of INDIA , the previous presidents of USA & PAKISTAN , on charges of master minding TERRORISM & murdering innocent people in their respective countries .
Edited, printed , published owned by NAGARAJA.M.R. @ # LIG-2 No 761,
HUDCO FIRST STAGE , OPP WATER WORKS , LAXMIKANTANAGAR , HEBBAL
,MYSURU – 570017 KARNATAKA INDIA Cell : 91 8970318202
WhatsApp 91 8970318202

Home page :
http://eclarionofdalit.dalitonline.in/ ,
https://dalit-online.blogspot.com/

Contact : editor@dalitonline.in , editor.dalitonline@gmail.com
View web version
About Me

Dalit-Online
View my complete profile