Sunday, May 31, 2015


Earlier I would have said that there may be an error in judgment; but we should not doubt the integrity of the judges but seeing the present judgments and orders of even the highest court in many cases, I cannot say that.

V. S. Sardesai

On Sunday, 31 May 2015 9:17 PM, PANDIAN Paulraj <> wrote:

It is NOT our intention to blame any one or any individual or the system. WE ARE CONFUSED. One judge says GUILTY. The same case, same accused, same arguments, another more experienced, more knowledgeable judge is saying NOT GUILTY. Who is wrong and who is right? It can not be brushed aside as awn aberration. Both are presenting 800 plus pages of reasoning to substantiate their conclusions. Obviously one of them is wrong. I am personally scared when my case comes up for judgment who will try me and with what result? Added to it is the immunity granted to the judiciary by itself. But then who will oversee the judiciary? The Politicians? That is the joke of the millennium. Regards.

Gopalkrishnan iyer <> wrote:

Simply put, naxalism, terrorism etc. are the offshoots of loosing faith in judiciary! One can find well educated people(if education is important) resorting to extremism/rebellion! Discrimination, deprivation, disparity are all leading to extremism!! Governance should incorporate all attributes that give rise to the above to be evened out!  

On Sunday, 31 May 2015 7:50 AM, Rakshpal Abrol <> wrote:

 Dear Sir,
Till date our Constitution has not define the word Citizen of India.
Citizenship Act,1955 has not yet been accepted by Government of India and the State Governments.
The judges are not law makers.
How many people of this country has signed the documents called Citizen of India format designed by the bureaucracy.It was proposed in the year 2004.
Therefore please do not blame the judiciary. 

Warm regards,
Rakshpal Abrol
Consumer Activist

From: PANDIAN Paulraj <>
Cc: Gopalkrishnan iyer <>; Dr. NC Jain <>;; Rakshpal Abrol <>; Janshakti <>; Barkha Dutt <>
Sent: Saturday, 30 May 2015 10:30 PM

Remember. In India LAW simply means
    Leave Accused if Wealthy.
It does not stop with actors, politicians
bureaucrats and the like. It is not the mistake of the judges. Advocates should not take up cases they know to be unjust or illegal. Finding a way to somehow save their client is not fair. They no doubt save the client; but in that process ruin the moral fibre of the nation. The only way a common man can show his displeasure is by social boycott. If you do not agree with the let away culprit, don't see his movies for ever; or don't buy the product the cricketer endorses ; or don't vote for the party the politicians belong to. Ganga may not be cleaner by then. The country will become cleaner.

Vijay Kapoor <> wrote:

>In this context, the recent order by SC as reported in the media, that a "judge" who has passed an absurd order cannot be questioned, is even more absurd. Question then arises: that if the "judge"  even in an absurd order cannot be questioned, can a judge who passes a criminal order, say, "go and shoot Mr. X" or "go and commit rape" or "burn down the house" can also not be brought to book !? Then can an absurd "judge" who passes an order, say, "I hereby sack the President of India" or "The parliament stands dissolved" be not brought to book ?
>The judges need to ponder the deleterious effects on the nation of their virtually complete accountability.
>On Wed, 5/20/15, Rakshpal Abrol <> wrote:
> To: "Gopalkrishnan iyer" <>, "Dr. NC Jain" <>, "" <>, "" <>
> Date: Wednesday, May 20, 2015, 1:04 AM
> The system was
> evolved taking into consideration of British
> laws.Most of the Advocates follow
> the same and being influenced the judges pass the
> order.The
> Justice is never delivered it is purchased.  
> Warm regards,   
> Rakshpal Abrol
> Consumer Activist
> 9820203154
>  From: Gopalkrishnan
> iyer <>
> To: Dr. NC Jain
> <>;
> ""
> <>;
> ""
> <>
>  Sent: Tuesday, 19 May
> 2015 3:22 PM
>  Subject: Re: [IAC#RG]
> There is
> no doubt left as to the fact that Indian justice system is
> not free from influence from powers that be, money power and
> high profile advocates.The recent verdicts one after the
> other seeng Salman khan virtually a free man within hours
> despite being convicted is ample proof that justice delivery
> is maneovreable! Harish Salve's presense in the court in
> a way subdued the Justice!! Or else all those involved in
> deliberating whether Salman is a culprit or not are  not at
> all knowing the law on which they argued for 13 years! 
> Jayalalitha'scase too is anopther instance cite!  Can a
> common man avail the services of Salve or the like of him
> and if so at what cost and how fast! Common man has to wait
> for months for an appontment where as all appointments were
> cancelled and flew down in Salmans case!!I should
> say the justice system also is influenced by status of
> people involved!
> Insider
> trader Gupta in the US was convicted in a matter of days and
> sentence followed in the same pace whereas Harshad
> Mehta's case is far from being over though the accused
> passed away long back!
> I think the jury system
> could speed up the justice system with least chance of a
> faulty delivery of justice

>  On Monday, 18 May 2015 12:47 PM, Dr.
> NC Jain <> wrote:
>  Dear
> sir    
> Such instances are very common.As everone is aware, justice
> delayed is justice denied and In India, it is a common
> practice in almost,most department. I have a case of
> noncompliance of CIC order for the last 4 years and cic is
> not replying/taking any action on it. In short,India is free
> but not Indians.We have to struggle to make Indians free.
> Dr
> N C Jain 
>      On Friday, May 15, 2015 1:14 AM,
> Vijay Kapoor <> wrote:
>  In
> theory there appeals are possible to set right the wrongs of
> lower courts. But things are entirely different in
> practice.
> I cite a couple of my own
> experiences:
> 1.  I filed a
> consumer complaint against a leading industrialist and
> builder of Goa in the State Consumer court. The
> "president judge", one Mr. Nelson Britto,
> apparently held the case in my favour because he granted me
> penal damages of Rs. 3.0 lacs against the builder. But look
> at the sheer malafides of the "judge" and his
> "order", who apparently imposed the penalty as a
> smokescreen to shield AND REWARD the errant industrialist.
> His entire order does not mention a single word as to why he
> imposed the penalty, and whether the builder was in
> deficency, in unfair trade practices, and providing
> hazardous services, WHEN the industrialist-builder has lied
> under oath and put a false document said to be the NOC from
> navy in the agreement to sell; the builder admitted in
> cross-examination under oath in that he destroyed evidence;
> that he never obtained the mandatory NOC from navy; that the
> brochure placed on record by me was his brochure; that he
> contravened
>  Registration Act; that he
> contravened The Transfer of Property Act by not disclosing
> material defects in the property; etc. and so on. There is a
> contravention of at least half a dozen major Acts and laws
> of the land. But the "judge" does not discuss any
> of the law points involved and does not utter a single word
> about all those. Finally to cap it all the "judge"
> ignores the prayers made by me to either give market value
> (with written quotations from 5 vicinity builders) OR a
> similar flat in nearby locality. Instead he gives interest @
> 15%, which means a loss in capital value to me of over 10
> lacs (excluding interest cost), and a corresponding gain to
> the industrialist.
> 2.  In
> another case in the same court the "judge", one
> Mr. Prabhudessai, who claims to be a law teacher in a local
> college, ignores all evidence on record and several points
> of law raised: Can the opposite party submissions that are
> not on affidavit and are merely verbal, be entertained by
> the court; Can a piece of paper without an Invoice Number /
> Tax registration, taxes be a valid "Invoice /
> Bill"; can the OP who has approached the court in not
> good faith be entertained; when there are 6 different
> agreements between the parties and with different dates and
> terms & conditions, can the matter be properly decided
> without first deciding which of the agreements is the valid
> one; when the OP himself does not dispute or refute the
> evidence placed on record, can the "judge"
> unilaterally decide differently that too without any
> reasoning; can the "judge" overrule at least 10 SC
> judgments on different subjects; can the "judge"
> overrule the law and the intent to
>  the
> parliment; can the "judge" order costs when
> several issues of law have been raised; etc. The appeal
> before the National Commission was the same  .......
> non-appreciation of evidence on record and several  law
> points raised. At this point as I came down with health
> problems I could not pursue the matter in the SC.
> There are many fine judges (I
> recall Justices Mr. Sachar and Mrs. Leila Seth, who settled
> my PF case in just 4 hearings and did not allow the govt.
> lawyers to dilly-dally. I also recall the justice in Delhi
> HC, who put his foot down by telling the govt judges to get
> on with their defence, if any, and the outcome was quaterly
> disclosure of results by corporates, and also certain
> provisins for transparency in results.) But, the problem is
> all-persuasive, and is not limited to the judiciary only. As
> the SC itself has said that the judges are part of the same
> society. One hopes that one encounters the good judges,
> babus, netas, of which there are many.
> There is need for ALL-ROUND reform as in
> REFORM. The elections, administration, judiciary, police,
> education, health, ... just everything.
> Regards,
> --------------------------------------------
> On Thu, 5/14/15, P.Mohana Chandran <>
> wrote:
>  Subject: Re:
>  To:
>  Date: Thursday, May 14, 2015, 1:08 AM

>  Shri Venkataraman may
>  kindly note that to err is human.Judges also
> may err-of
>  course not with the intention to
> err.The error may be on a
>  question of law
> or on a guestion of fact.To take care of
> such situations,law enables affected party to file
>  Appeal,Review,Revision etc.Do you wantthe
> Appellate Court to
>  confirm the trial court
> judgement in all cases and thereby
>  make the
> people to have faith in judiciary.TrialCourt and
>  Appellate Courts shall patiently hear the
> matter and give
>  judgements with out fear or
> favour.They need not worry about
>  the
> comments that may be made by persons like
> Shri.Venkataraman.
>  If the decision of
> Mr.Justice Kumaraswamy of
>  the Hon'ble
> Karnataka High Court is based on erroneous
> calculation (mathematical error ) in calculating the
> total
>  assets and total income and if the
> mismatch is really more
>  than 10% as is
> being propogated by some opposition leaders
>  in Tamilnadu, a mere Application  for Review will be
>  sufficient for the Judge to  correct the
> error.
>  The allegation was that since
>  Ms.Jayalalitha  is a politician,the case was
> prolonged for
>  more than a decade.On her
> coviction,when the Bail matter
>  came up
> before the Supreme Court ,coditional Bail was
>  granted,a consequence of which is expeditious
> disposal  of
>  the Appeal which resulted in
> quick disposal of the
>  Appeal.The economic
> status of the party concerned has
>  nothing
> to do with the case.
>  A resourceful /wealthy
> party may be able
>  to engage a team of legal
> experts and may be able to come
>  out
> successful by taking advantage of the loopholes in law.A
>  'daridra narayana' may have to depend
> on a lawyer
>  provided by Court or  Legal
> Services Authority who may  or
>  may not be
> good/capable of handling the matter.It is only in
>  this matter ,economically deprived persons are
> in a dis
>  advantageous position.Bail is the
> Rule and Jail is an
>  exception. Poor people
> are not capable of engaging a lawyer
>  and in
> cases that are not very serious,amicus curie is not
>  appointed by court for accused and hence they
> remain in jail
>  for days, months and  at
> times years.
>  I shall cite a case
> (Mrs.Indirra Gandhi)
>  where a High Court
> 's verdict was set aside by the
>  Supreme
> Court,not because the High Court was wrong but
>  because the Parliament amended the law with
> retrospective
>  effect.Incurring expenses by
> a candidate above the cut off
>  limit was an
> electoral malpractice even if the amount is
> spent by a  political party. Mrs.Gandhi was unseated as
>  Congress spent in excess of the cut off
> amount.During
>  emergency, law was amended
> with retrospective effect
>  stipulating that
> money spent by political parties shall not
> be counted to calculate the cut off amount .Both the
>  decisions were correct.Perhaps Shri
>  Venkataraman might not have uttered a word
> had
>  Ms.Jayalalitha got the Prevention of
> Corruption  Act
>  amended with retrospective
> effect exempting MPs,MLAs,MLCs
>  and Central
> and State Ministers from the per view of the
>  Prevention of Corruption  Act.I appreciate Ms
> Jayalalitha
>  for fighting the case by filing
> Appeal engaging ,of course
>  the best legal
> brain instead of managing to  amend the
> Prevention of Corruption  Act with the help of Mr Modi
> and
>  also the DMK P.Mohana
> Chandran
>  On Wed, May 13, 2015
>  at 9:08 AM, Raghavan R N <>
>  wrote:

>  Dear Sir,
> If some one is  Punished by a Court, it does not
>  mean Judiciary  is right . There are many
> cases  pending
>  Judgement  in a number of
> Courts in india, the two recently
>  came up
> for public attention is that of Ms Jayalalitha and
>  Mr Salman Khan
>  Every one
> knows that  Ms Jayalalitha's case
>  is
> one related to Politics and it is natural, every one
>  wanted her to be punished[ her opponents]. 
> She has been an
>  actress for a long time and
> her back ground is too good to
>  be
> considered that she amassed wealth only by political
>  means.  Judgement by a Lower Court need not
> necessarily
>  decide the final outcome. Law
> provides more options  till
>  Supreme Court.
> If it is a fit case for fighting, Govt should
>  initiate action to file a suit in Supreme
> Court. None
>  prevented and no one should
> close this option. Counting
>  dresses ,
> chappals and other house hold articles for
>  estimating the assets of Ms Jayalalitha looks
>  odd.
>  In the case of Ms Salman
> Khan, it can be
>  appreciated that this case
> is not of national importance.
>  Daily such
> run over cases happen in India and abroad and
>  even yesterday three women were killed under
> the wheels of a
>  police vehicle. It is an
> accident can be due to
>  negligence.Here too,
> the accused has options to
>  appeal in higher
> court to get justice. Bail was granted as
> he is an actor and is working in number of FILMS. All get
>  affected. Granting bail , fast or slow cannot
> be questioned.
>  Definitely, prominent people
> get things done fast and for
>  others, it
> takes time. It is Indian culture and way of doing
>  things in India.  

>  raghavan rn

>  From:
>  Date: Tue, 12 May 2015 12:47:50 -0400
>  To:

>  One more case of
> SATYAM   Ramblings Raju. The fraud is
>  a
> open book to every one. He got bail with in a
>  month. 
>  Sent from my iPhone
>  On
> 12-May-2015, at 3:41 am, Jagjit Ahuja <>
>  wrote:

> Judiciary in India has
>  made a mockery of
> themselves . They know that there is  no
> one in the governing system who can punish them for all
> the
>  wrongs. Now with the judgement made in
> favour of
>  Jayalalitha clearly shows that
> how our judiciary has been
>  working . The
> presenting officers and the defence
>  advocates have been playing games with each other .At
>  least punish out off  those who have been
> proved to be
>  wrong .
>  Same
> thing happened with the case of Salman
> Khan.
>  On Mon, May 11, 2015 at 8:41 PM,
> Venkatraman Ns <>
>  wrote:
>  To
> India Against Corruption



>  After
> several years
>  of trial in a killing case,
> an actor was held guilty by the
>  court and
> jail term
>  awarded. But, he got bail in a
> few hours 
>  from another judge. After
> several years of trial in a
>  corruption
> case, a
>  Chief Minister was found guilty and
> awarded jail term and
>  hefty fine. But,
>  after a few months, a higher court judge
> called her innocent
>  and acquitted
>  everyone involved totally. Now, one wonders
> which judge is
>  right and which judge
>  is wrong.

> While rich
>  politicians and cinema actors
> seem to have the last laugh,
>  there are
> thousands
>  of dharidhranarayanas in India
> who stay in jail for lesser
>  crime for
> several
>  years without being heard. Are they
> not as much Indians as
>  the cinema actor
>  driving his car on a pavement dweller and rich
> politician
>  indulging in corrupt
>  practices ? Are we settling down for this sort
> of democracy
>  in India ?
>  An average common man
>  in
> India, millions of whom do not have any political
>  affiliation have already
>  lost
> faith in the politicians in power and bureaucracy. He
>  has been thinking that
>  the
> judiciary is ultimate conscience keeper of the country.
>  But, when judiciary
>  give
> judgements with so much of contradiction between one
>  judge and the other
>  and
>  providing  bail and relief
>  to the
> convicted actor and
>  politicians with
>  great speed and with
>   many judges in
> India already having been
>  accused of
> corrupt practices in the past, people 
> tend to develop doubts about judiciary
> too.

>  Now, what can a
>  common man do , if he loses faith in
> politicians in power,
>  bureaucrats and
>  judges? It is alarming to think about such
> situation and the
>  possibilities.
>  N.S.Venkataraman

>  Post:
> ""

>  Exit: ""

>  Quit: ""

>  Help:

>  WWW :

>  Post:
> ""
>  Exit: ""
>  Quit: ""

>  Help:
>  WWW :
>  Post: ""
>  Exit: ""
>  Quit: ""

>  Help:
>  WWW :

>  Post: ""

>  Exit: ""

>  Quit: ""

>  Help:

>  WWW :

> -----Inline Attachment Follows-----

>  Post: ""
>  Exit: ""
>  Quit: ""
>  Help:
>  WWW :
> Post: ""
> Exit: ""
> Quit: ""
> Help:
> WWW :
> Post: ""
> Exit: ""
> Quit: ""
> Help:
> WWW :
> Post: ""
> Exit: ""
> Quit: ""
> Help:
> WWW :
>Post: ""
>Exit: ""
>Quit: ""
>WWW :

No comments:

Post a Comment