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

Hi,

Please suggest how to un subscribe from this chain of mails

Regards
Hijo


-----Original Message-----
From: indiaresists-request@lists.riseup.net
[mailto:indiaresists-request@lists.riseup.net] On Behalf Of Sukla Sen
Sent: 01 June 2013 16:07
To: indiaresists@lists.riseup.net; issueonline
Cc: media_monitor5@yahoogroups.com
Subject: 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_Inju
stices.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-300
x183.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
The information contained in this electronic message and any attachments to this message are intended for the exclusive use of the addressee(s) and may contain proprietary, confidential or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient, you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately and destroy all copies of this message and any attachment contained in it.