Re: [IAC#RG] TAINTED CHARACTERS IN INDIAN JUDICIARY

The complete story can be looked up here:
<http://archive.tehelka.com/story_main47.asp?filename=Ne021010Chief_Injustices.asp>.

Sukla

On 31/05/2013, S kumar <kumar_8134@yahoo.com> wrote:
> MORE ON TAINTED JUDICIARY
> Truth, in India, has only
> recently become defence. But if the court pursues these courageous
> affidavits
> and tasks the Bhushans to prove their allegations with evidence, it could
> become a unique moment in history. Retired justice VR Krishna Iyer has
> already said this is a historic opportunity for public cleansing. The first
> step is to share information in public interest. Here, therefore, are
> edited
> excerpts from Prashant Bhushan's affidavit.
>
> RANGANATH
> MISHRA
>
> 25.09.1990
> - 24.11.1991
>
> CHIEF JUSTICE Ranganath
> Mishra as a judge of the Supreme Court presided over a Commission of
> Inquiry
> on the genocide of Sikhs in 1984. He conducted the inquiry proceedings in a
> highly biased manner and went on to give a clean chit to the Congress
> party,
> despite there being considerable evidence implicating senior leaders of the
> party.
>
> After conducting inquiries into the 1984 riots, he became a Congress Rajya
> Sabha MP
> The evidence
> against the Congress leaders and party has come out in subsequent official
> inquiry reports as well as in the subsequent CBI investigations.
>
> He went on, after
> his retirement, to agree to become a Rajya Sabha MP of the Congress. Such
> actions, to my mind, clearly smack of corruption. Corruption, as I have
> mentioned earlier, is not used in a narrow sense of taking bribe alone, but
> in
> a wider sense of being morally culpable or blameworthy. Rewarded with post
> retirement Commission for many years
>
> KN
> SINGH
>
> 25.11.1991
> - 12.12.1991
>
> CHIEF JUSTICE KNSingh
> who followed Justice Rangnath Mishra, passed a series of unusually
> benevolent orders in favour of Jain Exports and its sister concern Jain
> Shudh
> Vanaspati. Several of these were passed during
> his 18-day tenure as Chief Justice, and many of these cases were
> ordered to be listed before him by oral mentioning.
>
> This became such a
> talked about scandal in the corridors of the Court that eventually in a
> hearing
> on 9 December 1991, the counsel for the Union of India was forced to object
> to the manner in which the cases came to be listed before Justice KN
> Singh's
> bench. He was forced to give a laboured explanation about how and why he
> ordered the matter to be listed before him when it was before another
> bench.
>
> All these judgments
> came to be reviewed and reversed later by a series of subsequent benches,in
> some of which, the review petitions were heard in open court, in a
> departure
> from the normal procedure.
>
> Passed a series of orders in favour of Jain Shudh Vanaspati. These were
> later set aside
> On 1 April 1991 and
> 9 September 1991, Justice KN Singh allowed two Civil Appeals of Jain
> Exports
> regarding the import of caustic soda and reduced the import duty payable by
> the
> company from 92 percent to 10 percent. Both these orders were subsequently
> reviewed and set aside.
>
>
> On 28 November
> 1991, (during his 18 day tenure as CJI) Justice Singh dismissed the appeal
> of
> Union of India against Jain Shudh Vanaspati in a case involving the import
> of
> edible oil in stainless steel containers (the import of which was banned),
> which were fraudulently painted over to disguise them as mild steel
> containers.This order was reviewed and set aside on 16 July 1993 by
> a bench of Justice JS Verma and PB Sawant.
>
> All these orders of
> Justice KN Singh in the Jain Exports and Jain Shudh Vanaspati cases were
> widely
> understood and regarded as having been passed for corrupt considerations.
> They
> became a much talked about scandal in the Court, even while he was Chief
> Justice.
>
> AM
> AHMADI
>
> 25.10.1994
> - 24.03.1997
>
> CHIEF JUSTICE AM
> Ahmadi, who succeeded Justice Venkatachalaiah (who was widely respected and
> regarded as a judge of great integrity), went
> on to quash the charge of culpable homicide in the criminal case arising out
> of
> the Bhopal Gas
> leak. Seven benches were changed during the hearing of this case, the only
> common judge in all these benches was Justice Ahmadi who was Chief Justice
> and
> constituting the benches.
>
> This judgment of
> quashing the charge of culpable homicide before the trial not only delayed
> the
> trial but led to such miscarriage of justice, that the Supreme Court has
> thought it fit to issue notice on a curative petition filed by the CBI even
> 14
> years after that judgment.
>
> Justice Ahmadi then
> went on to deal with and pass several orders in the Union Carbide case
> involving the setting up of a hospital from the sale proceeds of Union
> Carbide
> India Limited's shares held by Union Carbide Corporation, USA.
>
> In fact, he passed
> the orders releasing the amount of Rs. 187 crore for the construction of
> the
> hospital from the attached funds of Union Carbide. Quite remarkably, after
> having dealt with these cases of Union Carbide, Justice Ahmadi (soon after
> his
> retirement) went on to become the lifetime Chairman of the same hospital
> trust
> whose case he had extensively dealt with as Chief Justice. and reportedly
> used the Hospital facilities for the elite and not Gas affected.
>
>
> A Supreme Court
> bench headed by Justice Kuldip Singh had, on 10 May 1996, passed an order
> staying all construction within 5 km of Badkal and Surajkund lakes in
> Faridabad for
> environmental reasons. This order prevented any construction in plots in a
> development called Kant Enclave, which is adjoining Surajkund lake and on
> land
> which had been notified as Forest Land under S4 of the
> Punjab Land Preservation Act.
>
> Being forest land,
> no construction was permissible on this land without the prior permission
> of
> the Union Ministry of Environment and Forests, and also without the
> permission
> of the Supreme Court by virtue of the orders of the Court in the Godavarman
> case.
>
> Despite
> this, however, Justice Ahmadi, who was as this time the Chief Justice of
> the
> Court, went on to purchase plots in this development around this time and
> also
> went on thereafter to construct one of the first houses on this (a palatial
> house where he has lived since his retirement) in violation of the orders
> of
> the Court and the Forest Conservation Act.
>
> He bought land, built a house in Kant Enclave in Surajkund. The court had
> ruled it illegal
> Soon after the
> original order of Justice Kuldip Singh, Justice Ahmadi as Chief Justice set
> about reconstituting these benches and urgently listing review petitions
> filed
> by Kant Enclave and others against these orders, where these orders came to
> be
> successively modified.
>
>
> The order
> prohibiting construction within 5 km of the lakes was modified to 1 km by
> the
> order dated 11 October 1996. This order was further modified in the review
> petitions filed by Kant Enclave and others by order dated 17 March 1997, to
> obviate
> the need to no-objection certificates from the Pollution Control Boards for
> construction. This was further modified by even allowing construction even
> within 1 km of Surajkund lake by an order dated 13 April 1998 by a bench
> headed
> by the then Chief Justice MM Punchhi.
>
> The
> fact that the construction of Justice Ahmadi's house in Kant Enclave is
> completely illegal and in violation of the Supreme Court's judgments, as
> well
> as the Forest Conservation Act, has now been emphatically stated by the
> Supreme
> Court itself in its order dated 14 May 2008 on the clarification application
> on
> behalf of Kant Enclave.
>
> The Centrally
> Empowered Committee of the Court has found the violations of those who
> constructed their houses in Kant Enclave so egregious, that they have
> recommended the demolition of these constructions which includes that of
> Justice Ahmadi in their report dated 13 January 2009.I
> regard Justice Ahmadi's actions in all this as morally culpable and indeed
> corrupt. They had become a much talked about scandal in the corridors of
> the
> court as well as among judges at that time.
>
> MM
> PUNCHHI
>
> 18.01.1998
> - 09.10.1998
>
> JUSTICE PUNCHHIhad a
> short tenure of 10 months. He succeeded Justice Verma, who is widely
> regarded as one of the finest and most upright Chief Justices of the
> Supreme
> Court. The Committee on Judicial Accountability had prepared an
> impeachment motion against Justice Punchhi, which had been signed by more
> than
> 25 members of the Rajya Sabha, but did not get the requisite number of
> signatures since he went on to become Chief Justice of India. The six
> extremely serious charges in the impeachment
> motion are detailed below:
>
> 1. As a Judge of
> the Supreme Court, while deciding an appeal of Shri KN Tapuria against a
> judgment of the Bombay High Court, dated 10.12.93 by which he was sentenced
> to
> two years rigorous imprisonment, Justice Punchhi allowed the Appeal and
> acquitted Shri Tapuria on the basis of a purported compromise entered into
> between Shri Tapuria and the alleged representative of M/s Turner Morrison
> & Co, and thereby remitted his prison sentence. This was done despite
> the fact that the offence of criminal breach of trust for which Shri
> Tapuria
> had been convicted cannot be compounded in law and thus could not have been
> allowed to be compromised by the complainant. The order passed by Justice
> Punchhi was on extraneous considerations.
>
> 2. As a Judge of
> the Punjab & Haryana High Court, Justice Punchhi heard and dismissed a Writ
> Petition of the Vice Chancellor of the Rohtak University, Dr Ram Gopal,
> containing serious allegations of malafides against the then Chief Minister
> of
> Haryana Bhajan Lal. That while he decided
> this case dismissing allegations against Bhajan Lal, two of his unmarried
> daughters residing with him, Madhu and Priya, applied for and got allotment
> of
> two valuable house plots in Gurgaon from the discretionary quota of the
> Chief
> Minister. The plots were allotted on 1.5.86, the same day
> Justice Punchhi dismissed Ram Gopal's Writ Petition against Bhajan Lal. The
> judgment of Justice Punchhi dismissing the Writ Petition was obviously given
> on
> extraneous considerations.
>
> 3. As Inspecting
> Judge of the Punjab & Haryana High Court, Justice Punchhi made an adverse
> inspection report questioning his integrity, against KS Bhullar,
> Sub-Judge-cum-
> Judicial Magistrate of Punjab, for the reason that Bhullar had refused to
> decide a case before him involving Justice Punchhi's co-brother in his
> favour.
>
> 4. As a Judge of
> the Supreme Court, Justice Punchhi attempted to hear and decide a case
> involving the validity of section 8 (a) of the Capital of Punjab
> (Development and Regulation) Act, 1952 though he was personally interested
> in
> the outcome of the case.
>
> He decided on a case about a law when he was personally interested in the
> outcome
> 5. That Justice
> Punchhi attempted to browbeat officials of the Registry of the Punjab &
> Haryana High Court when they came to take inventory of items of furniture
> at
> the residence of the then Chief Justice of the Punjab & Haryana High Court,
> Justice V Ramaswami. He ordered them to mention in the inventory report
> that
> all the items had been found in order even when these had not been verified
> and
> this was not true.Thereafter, when this matter became
> subject of the impeachment proceedings and was put in issue in Writ
> Petitions
> filed in the Supreme Court, Justice Punchhi attempted to hear and decide
> that
> case, though in view of his role in the matter, he was clearly disentitled
> from
> doing so.
>
> 6. That as Judge of
> the Supreme Court, Justice Punchhi, kept pending with him a matrimonial
> proceeding involving one Ashok and Rupa Hurra from Gujarat,
> even after it had become infructuous. The matter was kept pending in order
> that
> a fresh petition to be filed by the husband also come before him. These
> proceedings were finally decided by him for extraneous considerations in a
> manner which was contrary to law.
>
> AS
> ANAND
>
> 10.10.1998
> - 01.11.2001
>
> JUSTICE ANAND,who
> succeeded Justice Punchhi, too enjoyed a very controversial tenure as Chief
> Justice of India. During his tenure, evidence of several acts of very
> serious misconduct came to light and came to the possession of the Committee
> on
> Judicial Accountability. As a result of this, an
> impeachment motion was also prepared by the Committee on Judicial
> Accountability against Justice Anand, which contained four serious charges
> which are detailed below:
>
> 1. That AS Anand,
> when he was the Chief Justice of the High Court at J&K, heard and passed
> favourable interim orders in the case of one Krishan Kumar Amla, soon after
> he had accepted gratification from Amla in the form of a 2 Kanal plot of
> land
> at Ganderbal, Srinagar. That Anand accepted this gratification from Amla
> even though he had been as a judge hearing and dealing with the cases of
> the
> companies owned by Krishan Amla and his father Tirath Ram Amla. These acts
> constitute gross misconduct and misbehaviour on the part of a Judge.
>
> 2. That AS Anand
> abused his office and influence as a judge and Chief Justice of the J&K
> High Court to hold on to the ownership of agricultural land which should
> have
> been vested in the government under the J&K Agrarian Reforms Act of 1976.
>
> He passed an order favouring a person from whom he had received a plot of
> land
> 3. That AS Anand
> while he was a judge of the Supreme Court abetted his wife and mother-in-law
> in
> filing a suit based on false averments in a civil court in Madhya Pradesh.
> During the proceedings before the civil court, he abused his influence and
> authority to get the revenue authorities to suppress from the trial court
> the
> record of the proceedings before the revenue court. That he subsequently
> used
> his influence to get the State Government of MP to withdraw the Special
> Leave
> Petition filed by the State against his wife.
>
> 4. That Anand
> abused his office and influence as Chief Justice of the J&K High Court to
> get from the government of J&K a 2-kanal plot of land at Gandhinagar in
> Jammu for a price which
> was a small fraction of the market price. That in
> doing so, he gave a false and misleading affidavit that he owned no land or
> immovable property in Jammu.
>
> Despite the fact
> that there was documentary evidence of serious charges of corruption
> against
> Justice Anand it was not possible to get the impeachment motion signed by
> the
> requisite number of MPs against a sitting Chief Justice of the Supreme
> Court.MPs are
> very reluctant to sign an impeachment motion against a sitting judge of the
> Supreme Court or a sitting Chief Justice of a High Court, even if one has
> documentary evidence of serious charges of misconduct against the judge
> concerned. This is because of a fear of judicial backlash against the MP or
> his political party, most of whom have cases pending in the courts.
> YK
> SABHARWAL
>
> O1.11.2005
> - 14.01.2007
>
> ON 3 AUGUST2007, the
> Campaign for Judicial Accountability had issued a press release detailing
> several serious charges against Chief Justice YK Sabharwal. The most serious
> among these charges was that he passed a series of orders
> for sealing commercial properties in Delhi,
> operating in residential areas.
>
> The immediate
> consequence of his orders was to force shops and offices to shift to
> shopping
> malls and commercial complexes being constructed by builders and
> developers,
> which resulted in increasing their prices enormously almost overnight. At
> precisely the time when Justice Sabharwal passed these
> orders of sealing, his sons entered into partnerships with some of the
> largest
> shopping mall and commercial complex developers and thus made huge profits.
> Moreover, the registered offices of his sons' companies were at the
> official
> residence of Justice Sabharwal at this time.
>
> While he heard the Amar Singh tapes case, his sons got land allotments in
> Noida
> Apart from this,
> his sons were allotted huge commercial plots by the Mulayam Singh government
> of
> Uttar Pradesh in Noida at highly concessional rates, at a time when Justice
> Sabharwal was dealing with the case of Amar Singh's tapes, the publication
> of
> which he had stayed.
>
>
> As a result of
> these transactions, the sons of Justice Sabharwal, who till he started
> dealing
> with the sealing case, were small traders having a turnover of less than Rs.
> 2
> crore went on to purchase a property of Rs. 15.43 crore in Maharani Bagh in
> March 2007 and more recently a property at 7 Sikandra Road for Rs. 122
> crore
> (in partnership with their builder friends) in April 2010.
>
> The property at Sikandra Road was
> purchased by Justice Sabharwal's sons for Rs.122 crore with the help of a
> number of unconscionable judicial orders of single judges of the Delhi High
> Court, at a time when the property was worth well over Rs.150 crore.
>
> Despite complaints
> to the CBI and the CVC, however, no FIR appears to have been registered nor
> any
> investigation done by the CBI.
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Vijay Kapoor <vijay99kapoor@yahoo.com>
> To: indiaresists@lists.riseup.net
> Sent: Friday, May 31, 2013 6:07 PM
> Subject: Re: [IAC#RG] TAINTED CHARACTERS IN INDIAN JUDICIARY
>
> Not only that, but here is a partial bag of tricks played by "judges" that I
> have encountered:
> 1. I filed an execution application together with application for president
> to recuse in view of his extra-ordinary bias and judicial cheating. The
> Registrar gave a date, but the "judge" did not hear the matter. I met him in
> his chambers as to why the matter was not called. He said that it is not the
> registrar who gives the date, but he. If I wanted my matter to be heard, I
> should withdraw my application for his recusal!
> 2. They will completely ignore all the law points, evidence, as well as
> precedents from SC/HC. In other words, they will pronounce their own version
> of law! This is contra s 141/144 of the constitution.
> 3. They will turn and twist facts, evidence and circumstances to suit their
> own version of the law.
> 4. They will introduce issues that neither you nor the OP argued.
> 5. They will totally ignore the prayers, and introduce their own "reliefs",
> which naturally will be as per their own corrupt purposes rather than as per
> law of the land.
> 6. Etc.
> Regards,
> Vijay Kapoor
>
> --- On Fri, 5/31/13, Naveen Johri <naveenjohri@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>>From: Naveen Johri <naveenjohri@gmail.com>
>>Subject: Re: [IAC#RG] TAINTED CHARACTERS IN INDIAN JUDICIARY
>>To: indiaresists@lists.riseup.net
>>Date: Friday, May 31, 2013, 3:51 AM
>>
>>
>>Dear sirs
>>Exactly the same thing happened with me three years back at Allahabad high
>> court
>>In open court the high court judge dismissed the petition as the
>> petitioner failed to deposit the amount decreed by lower court after many
>> defaults thereby quashingthe petition.
>>Few days later when the order came it was another date.
>>Nothing much could be done ..my advocate advised to accept the fate
>> meekly..
>>One can't tape the proceedings in the court
>>NK Johri
>>
>>from my Android phone
>>On May 31, 2013 3:21 PM, "SURESHAN P" <sureshandelhi@gmail.com> wrote:
>>Dear Pankaj , this kind of stories are enormous in our country , a
>>>person who knows little bit about the courts and judges of this
>>>country believes that judiciary are as corrupt as any other agency .
>>>only people who never had an occasion to experience the working of the
>>>courts only put their faith upon judiciary. Our gods are richest
>>>because of our system , In this country people believes that every
>>>thing happens because of of destiny. astrologer and God's men's
>>>happy lots in the system. All is Ram Barosa. In other developed
>>>countries they have a better system and thus no body cares about GOD.
>>>
>>>regards
>>>
>>>On 5/31/13, Pankaj Rai <raipankaj@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>> I have personal experience of two judges of High Court of Karnataka
>>>> pronouncing an order in the open court and then going back on their
>>>> word.
>>>> Legally I have challenged that and also filed an administrative about
>>>> the
>>>> misconduct of the two judges.
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>>
>>>> Pankaj
>>>>
>>>> Maj Pankaj Rai (Retd),
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ________________________________
>>>> From: Jagjit Ahuja <jagjit.ahuja@gmail.com>
>>>> To: "indiaresists@lists.riseup.net" <indiaresists@lists.riseup.net>
>>>> Cc: prakash risbud <risbud_p@yahoo.com>
>>>> Sent: Thursday, 30 May 2013 11:32 AM
>>>> Subject: [IAC#RG] TAINTED CHARACTERS IN INDIAN JUDICIARY
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> There is no transparency in our total governing system . They have all
>>>> the
>>>> powers but no responsibility and accountability.Every one in the rung
>>>> particularly the politicians , bureaucracy and judiciary have been
>>>> taking
>>>> the maximum advantage.They ensured safeguards at every step so as no to
>>>> be
>>>> punished for their misdeeds.
>>>> Recently one IAS officer of Karnataka was tried and punished by Lokpal
>>>> Court for wrongfully distribution of land to his favorites . When he
>>>> appealed against the punishment , the Karnataka High Court dismissed
>>>> the
>>>> case saying that Government permission was not taken before trying this
>>>> IAS
>>>> officer.This is how they find the loopholes in the laws but never go
>>>> into
>>>> the gravity of the crime.
>>>> How long this will continue? Thus the first step needed is to rejuvenate
>>>> the
>>>> judiciary .
>>>>
>>>> brig J S Ahuja
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Thursday, May 30, 2013, Mr. Hemant Kshirsagar
>>>> <hemantkshirsagar01@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> Revert the same to Appellate of that organization with copy of refused
>>>>> "postal letter", with letter for such incident. If no response forward
>>>>> the
>>>>> same to CIC, with all copies of communications.
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>> Hemant K
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 5:54 PM, prakash risbud <risbud_p@yahoo.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi Can anyone tell me if RTI letter is refused and sent back as
>>>>> refused
>>>>> what is the further process.
>>>>> Thanks
>>>>> prakash
>>>>> From: v.v. mishra <vmishra70@gmail.com>
>>>>> To: indiaresists@lists.riseup.net
>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, May 29, 2013 11:22 AM
>>>>> Subject: Re: [IAC#RG] TAINTED CHARACTERS IN INDIAN JUDICIARY
>>>>> send more details.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Adv V Mishra
>>>>> On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 4:51 AM, Vijay Kapoor
>>>>> <vijay99kapoor@yahoo.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> My experience with judges discloses that many, if not most, are
>>>>> corrupt.
>>>>> They are typically beholden to the rich and powerful, thereby
>>>>> disclosing a
>>>>> feeble mind. The country is in urgent need for complete overhaul of
>>>>> the
>>>>> judiciary .... recruitment, training, monitoring & evaluation, and
>>>>> weeding.
>>>>>
>>>>> Vijay Kapoor
>>>>> --- On Tue, 5/28/13, Jasvir Singh <jasvir70@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> From: Jasvir Singh <jasvir70@gmail.com>
>>>>> Subject: Re: [IAC#RG] TAINTED CHARACTERS IN INDIAN JUDICIARY
>>>>> To: indiaresists@lists.riseup.net
>>>>> Date: Tuesday, May 28, 2013, 2:59 AM
>>>>> Dear Maniramji, you have raised a very pertinent issue. The appointment
>>>>> to
>>>>> the chairs of the CBI is also highly questionable, so very
>>>>> comprehensive
>>>>> and wide ranging reforms shall be required to be put in place. I share
>>>>> your concerns over the deplorable plight of the judicial system in
>>>>> our
>>>>> country.
>>>>> regards
>>>>> jasvir
>>>>> On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 11:33 AM, MANIRAM SHARMA
>>>>> <http://us.mc1402.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=maniramsharma@gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> From: Mani Ram Sharma
>>>>> Advocate
>>>>>
>>>>> Nakul Niwas, Behind Roadways Depot
>>>>> Sardarshahar- 331 403-7District Churu (Raj)
>>>>> http://us.mc14/
>>>> Post: "indiaresists@lists.riseup.net"
>>>> Exit: "indiaresists-unsubscribe@lists.riseup.net"
>>>> Quit: "https://lists.riseup.net/www/signoff/indiaresists"
>>>> Help: https://help.riseup.net/en/list-user
>>>> WWW : http://indiaagainstcorruption.net.in/
>>>
>>>
>>>--
>>>http://freedomteam.in/blog/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/ftilogo-new-300x183.jpg
>>>P. Sureshan,
>>>Advocate-on-record, Supreme Court Of India,
>>>NLC( India ) Law Office
>>>257-F, Ground Floor,Street No-6, West Guru Angad Nagar, Laxmi Nagar,
>>>Delhi-92..... Ph: 9818083219,8802797432
>>>
>>>Post: "indiaresists@lists.riseup.net"
>>>Exit: "indiaresists-unsubscribe@lists.riseup.net"
>>>Quit: "https://lists.riseup.net/www/signoff/indiaresists"
>>>Help: https://help.riseup.net/en/list-user
>>>WWW : http://indiaagainstcorruption.net.in/
>>>
>>-----Inline Attachment Follows-----
>>
>>
>>Post: "indiaresists@lists.riseup.net"Exit:
>> "indiaresists-unsubscribe@lists.riseup.net"Quit:
>> "https://lists.riseup.net/www/signoff/indiaresists" Help:
>> https://help.riseup.net/en/list-userWWW :
>> http://indiaagainstcorruption.net.in/ Post:
>> "indiaresists@lists.riseup.net"Exit:
>> "indiaresists-unsubscribe@lists.riseup.net"Quit:
>> "https://lists.riseup.net/www/signoff/indiaresists" Help:
>> https://help.riseup.net/en/list-userWWW :
>> http://indiaagainstcorruption.net.in/


--
Peace Is Doable