Exclusive HOLI Discounts!
Get Courses and Combos at Upto 50% OFF!
Upgrad
LCI Learning

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More


(Guest)

Only judgement NOT justice

It is a well known opinion that only judgement are passed not justice as we see many times higher courts invert/change the judgement of a lower court.which means lower court did not do justice at all.

Then how can we call judges by the name of "Justice" while many times they are doing injustice by passing wrong judgement ? 



Learning

 12 Replies

Anil Agrawal (Retired)     19 July 2010

 

The Mumbai High Court had passed the following judgement in one case:
45. Therefore, looking to the urgency of these matters, we direct the Registrar General to appoint following judicial officers in various cities of Maharashtra to deal with cases under Section 138 of the Act exclusively:
 
Sr. No. District No. of officers
 
 1. Mumbai 15
 2. Pune 12
 3..Nagpur 4
 4. Ahmednagar 2
 5. Aurangabad 1
 6. Nashik 2
 7. Kolhapur 1
 8. Solapur 1
 9. Thane 2
10. Satara 1
11. Jalgaon 1
 
                Total 42
   46. The Registrar General is directed to post the officers as enumerated in preceding paragraph within two weeks.
When I asked under the RTI to confirm that the order had been implemented, I was told that information on judicial proceedings cannot be provided. It is implementation of the judgement or judicial proceedings?
 

Bhartiya No. 1 (Nationalist)     19 July 2010

The information provider used to be semi baked/ semieducated persons, It is amazing that he can not differentiate between Judgement and judicial proceeding, and also liable to be dismissed, but would have been drawing huge salary. Interaction/encounter with this type of govt. officials will make one mad.

With our present justice system, it is almost impossible to do justice. There is lot of scope  present at any stage for manipulation, and  innocent will be held guilty.

Anil Agrawal (Retired)     19 July 2010

Sh...Sh..Sh..

The information provider is Master and Assistant Prothonotary in the High Court.

Anil Agrawal (Retired)     20 July 2010

How helpless is our judiciary and how powerful is our police. The irony is that we are afraid of the police and we are taught to respect the judiciary.

 

Delhi Police faces sharp criticism from trial court for not being punctual

NEW DELHI: After being pulled up for shoddy investigations and lackadaisical attitude towards carrying out probes, Delhi Police have now faced sharp criticism from a trial court for not being punctual leading to wastage of time of the court. 

Additional sessions judge Girish Kathpalia slammed the police officers for "curtailing liberty'' of an individual with their approach and for being late during judicial proceedings. "Approach of the police while dealing with bail applications and even anticipatory bail applications is extremely callous,'' the court said. 

It pointed out that the investigating officers (IOs) reach the court mostly by 10.30am, though the judicial proceedings start by 10am. "It is indeed a wake-up call for the state agencies who want to curtail liberty of a citizen in such a slipshod manner... Earlier also, an order had been communicated to senior functionaries of the police for directions to the IOs to report in time but to no avail,'' the court said. 

The court has also directed that a copy of its order be forwarded to the commissioner of police to apprise him of the situation, so that he can look into the matter. Further, the IOs also fail to brief the prosecutors about the case beforehand, the court said. 

"Not just delayed arrival of IOs, there is another laxity to the effect that in cases where the IO is on leave, the SHO does not bother to appear and brief the prosecutor. At times, even the investigation file is not sent and at times, the officer with the file is not completely conversant with the relevant facts,'' ASJ Kathpalia said. The judge pointed out that the police officers also fail to collect previous bail orders passed by lower courts, prompting adjournments and even affecting the liberty of an individual. "Such kind of laxities are also causing a lot of wastage of judicial time and almost every day, board (listed matters) of this court gets spilled over much beyond even the court working hours,'' the court said, while hearing a bail application in a matter.

 

Bhartiya No. 1 (Nationalist)     21 July 2010

Sir, That is why Police is Supreme. The kind of relief Police is capable of providing in minutes, any court cann't in years.

Here I am posting excerpts of the headline "

Criminal justice system has collapsed: SC

Coming to the hit-and-run case and the involvement of two well-known lawyers — defence counsel Anand and public prosecutor Khan — and the manner in which they allegedly manipulated the witness, the Bench said, "What happened in this case is the tip of the iceberg. This is a case of accident. We have seen cases involving smuggling of arms, RDX, narcotics where the accused get away. But we are helpless."

Salve said not only the judicial system, but there was a general tendency in all quarters to disregard the majesty of law and the judgments passed by the judiciary. "The apex court has repeatedly told the lawyer community not to go on strike. But we do not seem to care. The SC has told the police not to handcuff accused, but they have scant regard for it. The single directive principle protecting bureaucrats has been struck down repeatedly, but it still holds good. SC has ordered police reforms, but few states have implemented it," he said.


(Guest)

 

It is in Agenda of DRF to revive the designations of public servants as following;

 

Commissioner (Mandal Ayukta)       -  Zonal Servant (Mandal Sewak) 

 

Collector (Jiladheesh)                         -   District Servant (Zila Sewak)

 

Tahsildar                                                -  Tahsil Servant (Tahsil Sewak/Taluka Sewak)

 

CJM (Chief Judicial Magistrate)                       -  Chief Judicial Servant (CJS) (Mukhya Nyayik Sewak)

(Mukhya Nyay-Dandadhikari)

 

Friends, everyone please suggest for every designation.  Everyone at least suggest 5-10.

 

One day it will be done.

 

 

 

 

 

Bhartiya No. 1 (Nationalist)     21 July 2010

Samudreji,

Please look at it. "(Mukhya Nyay-Dandadhikari)"  does not come under the category of "Sevaks", Only beauro - crates and other administrative staffs will come under the category of "Sevaks"

CJM (Chief Judicial Magistrate)                       -  Chief Judicial Servant (CJS) (Mukhya Nyayik Sewak)

(Mukhya Nyay-Dandadhikari)                         


(Guest)

Ofcourse the Judicary is a public service and judges including CJI are public servants.  NO DOUBT IN IT THAT THEY ARE PUBLIC SERVANTS ASSIGNED THE JOB TO SERVE THE JUDGEMENT IF ANY CITIZEN SUBMIT THE PETITION.  Accordingly they are serving the JUDGEMENT (Not the "JUTICE").  Hence they should be held responsible and their perfomance should have accountability. 

 

Providing JUSTICE to the citizens is THE ONLY job of the Government.  Judiciary is only an agency for specific work to provide legal rights like Municipal Carporation is with specific assignments.  Their status is only autonomous in regard to their work.  BUT they are answerable for their performance in public service.  None has asked their answer it is a lacuna at the part of citizens and Government (Parliament).

 

Remember they are salaried from Government from public money.  They do not get the honourarium but it is a salary.  The public representative MP/MLA get the honorarium and not the salary.

 

If any doubt, please submit specific question, I will give information from the best of my knowledge with the documentary support.

 

girishankar (manager)     30 November 2010

Justice should be done on the spot.  Every delay is failure of justice system and finally it is a failure of the Judiciary.  Money can be recovered with interest but life's movements cannot be compensate.

Is it justice?  Million cases of injustice by the delay in justice system I can put up here.  It is not natural justice so the justice system is against the nature.  Human being is a natural kind and corrupeted justice system is against human being.


 

girishankar (manager)     30 November 2010

 

Dear Friends I got this thru Net:

 

As the Senior Bureacrats, IPS Officers and Judges approach their retirement, they fear loosing power and all the trappings of power like a car with a red beacon, citizens fearfully standing in attention before them or people moving out of their way, while walking in the corrdors of power. ...
43 minutes ago  ·  ·  · Share

What is happening now and What is a dream ... This dream can materialise, with citizens support.

Happening Now:

As the Senior Bureacrats, IPS Officers and Judges approach their retirement, they fear loosing power and all the trappings of power like a car with a red beacon, citizens fearfully standing in attention before them or people moving out of their way, while walking in the corrdors of power. So they start pleasing the rotten politicians in power, so that they be rewarded, with some extension or a post retirement position for 5 or 10 years in some powerful post, where they will be entitled to all that they were used to. Now since such posts as Information Commissioner or Member of the State Human Rights Commission, etc., are less in number, than the number of Sr Individuals retiring, there is intense competition, in a game "I will lick the ruling Politicians bottom better than others". The ones who lick the best are provided extensions or a lucrative post retirement job... And they continue to lick.

 

 

Ex-CJI Balakrishnan now NHRC chief: 

Ex-CJI K G Balakrishnan has been appointed as the chairperson of the National Human Rights Commission.The judge,who retired on May 12,will be the sixth NHRC chief and will have a tenure of five years.

 

Court grants six more months to chief secy

Shibu Thomas I TNN 

Mumbai: The Bombay high court on T h u r s d ay gave its nod to the extension in service granted to chief secretary Johny Joseph. A division bench headed by Chief Justice Swatanter Kumar dismissed a public interest litigation filed by a city advocate, challenging Joseph’s extension saying that the state had followed proper procedures.

Joseph, who was due to retire on May 31, was given a sixmonth extension. The state had justified the extension, saying Joseph was “indispensable for the time-being’’. The government produced a 14-page letter written by chief minister Ashok Chavan to the PM’s office, which claimed that Joseph was at the helm of several important projects that were crucial to the state. These included the implementation of the post-26/11 security measures as well as the execution of the next phase of the Ratnagiri Gas and Power Project that will provide an extra 900 MW of power to the state.

The letter also said Joseph was needed for the state budget and the assembly elections. He was also part of various important infrastructure projects, including the upgrade of airports, urban transport, water supply and sanitation, said the government. The state also pointed to Joseph’s capabilities as an able administrator; it mentioned his efficient handling of disaster management, following the Latur earthquake and monitoring as well as coordinating various security agencies during 26/11 terror attacks. 

Petitioner R R Tripathi had claimed that service rules had been violated to give Joseph an extension. The court said it could not go into the merits of the administrative order and would only look at if the statutory procedures had been followed.

( Reproduced from The Times Of India July 24, 2009 page 7)

Let us Dream Now.

A law is passed that no extensions will be allowed or lucrative posts will be given to anyone post retirement. Once the Senior Officers are aware that these are their last few years in service, they will do everything in their power, to improve the conditions prevalent in their departments, so that they are remembered by the public for the good work they did prior to retirement. There will now be competition amongst all of them, to do better work than others. it will be a reverse of of what is happening now ... Off course it is only a dream ... But sometimes dreams come true, if we work for it.

Need Powerful people to Join me in PILs in this regard.

Contact Indur Chhugani at ikchhugani@...

Mobile 098201 71571


You may comment on this article at
https://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=107199067380&ref=mf

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

>>> Indian Judiciary... Is it Stinking ?

Supreme Court Concedes ... the rot has set in Judiciary.

Example ... How Judges protect the corrupt

Warrant Industry...How the Magistrate / Police partnership flourishes.

Contribute funds ... To fight on, PLEAD needs funds.

Latest on this site ... This website informs of actions by Rogue Police in India.

How to register FIR at Police Station ... Download files giving instructions.

How Mumbai Police framed Chhugani .. TOI of 24/07/06 ... Happens across India everyday.

Rogue Police of India ... Narayana Murthy of INFOSYS was also arrested

Citizens Policing the Police is a MUST ...Need of the day




 
Fri Jun 4, 2010 10:29 pm

 
< Prev Message  |  Next Message >   
 
Expand Messages Author Sort by Date
Happening ... All Rotten Bottom Lickers Get Post Retirement Jobs Happening ... All Rotten Bottom Lickers Get Post Retirement Jobs
[image: Dalbara Singh Gill] <https://www.facebook.com/dsgill?ref=mf> Dalbara Singh Gill <https://www.facebook.com/dsgill> via Indur ...

 
 

girishankar (manager)     30 November 2010

Dear Friends I got this thru Net:

Chief Justice of US Supreme Court John Marshall had once said:



"Power of Judiciary lies not in deciding cases, nor in Imposing sentences nor in punishing for contempt, but in the trust, faith and confidence of the common man".

 

Are you ready to actively fight corruption ?

Justice Bilal Nazki, put extra ordinary efforts to ensure, I could not approach the Supreme Court fast. (Unaware I will not be able to take it to SC in any case, because of financial constraints ) ... Order copy was not being made available, of the rotten order passed on 11/9/2008, inspite of my efforts of going to HC different departments, every 3 days.

After I made complaints to Supreme Court, Prime Ministers Office, etc, on 21/11/2008, it finally was given on 4/12/2008.

Read Order:

"1 ... An undertaking has been filed by the Commissioner of Police that the Police Chowkies in question will be demolished within a period of six months time from today and make it clear that if the undertaking is not carried out necessary consequence will follow.

2. ... The petitioner who has brought this public interest matter is not in a position to understand the behaviour which people are expected to maintain at the courts and which behaviour is known to the lawyers by their conduct. Therefore, we requested him on several occasions to engage counsel, so that we could understand the point of view. Even otherwise this is a` matter of public interest and the petitioner has no interest. Therefore we relieve him of this case and he shall not be heard again in this case. However, we appoint Mr R. B. Raghuvanshi, the Additional Solicitor General, as amicus curiae to assist this case, List all the matters on 11th March 2009"....

Justice Bilal Nazki

 

 

Right now, he has ensured, the corrupt practice of receiving Rs 3 cr bribe per month continues unhindered till March 2009 atleast. ( and further 6 months ... because 11th March 2009 is HOLI Holiday ... Smart act ).

The Corrupt Judge, wanted a lawyer to be appointed, so that the lawyer takes a bribe share and kills the case ... Now he has appointed an Government nominee, to kill the case.

This corrupt Judge can be easily checkmated, if some activst is willing to file an intervening application immediatelly at the Bombay High Court ... or file a petition in the Supreme Court.

.........................................................................................................................................................

Justice Bilal Nazki by stopping me from arguing the petition, insisting I get a lawyer ...

... is indirectly trying to protect the Rs 3 crore bribe EVERY MONTH, received by the police from Advertising companies ... Who they help, to earn Rs 7-8 Crores every month, from advertisements on traffic pedestals and chowkies.  

 

 

In February 2008, I was offered Rs 1 crore for my NGO to NOT pursue the case ... Rs 40 lacs immediately and Rs 5 lacs for 12 months for absenting from court. ... Any lawyer IF appointed, will sell himself out for Rs 5 lacs ...
Case came up in Bombay HC on 25th August 2008, then 27th Aug then 8th September , on 9th September 2008 and finally on 11th September 2008.  

BUT on 8th September the Judge said, he will not allow me to argue & I must appoint a lawyer or just attend as observer ( I am the petitioner). ... have no money to appoint a lawyer... AND not interested in getting a lawyer to argue the case. 

On 11th September 2008, the judge once again disallowed me to argue the case and appointed a lawyer to become Amicus Curae of the court, thus successfully, ensuring that the bribes to police are not affected in any way....

What's more, he has now fixed the date as 11th March 2009, which means the police and their corrupt friends now have 6 months, to kill me and end the problem once and for all, with Justice Bilal Nazki's blessings.

Earlier in January 2008, I have delined police protection, after Justice J N Patel warned the police "Should any harm befall the petitioner, this court will hold the Police Commissioner directly responsible"... They have my refusal in writing.

And I have no intention now of asking for protection from the Rogue police.

How Rs 3 cr.. Affidavit at https://www.RoguePolice.com/100crore.htm

 

Press Reports of the proceedings in HC on 8th & 11th September 2008

Read from Times of india at https://www.RoguePolice.com/hccheats.htm


----------------------------------------------------------

Indian Judiciary ... Is it Stinking ?

The RTI Act was introduced to check corruption, by opening up information to citizens. Unfortunately the the Information Commissioners entrusted with the job of overseeing the proper implementation of the act, are trying to sabotage the act.

The Judges at every level, try their best to help the corrupt politicians and the powerful, rare is a Judicial officer who does not bow to the ruling rogues of India.

Join In NOW:

Indian Judiciary ... Is it stinking ?


https://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=40507761800

( please copy and paste above address in browser )

 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Latest on this site ... This website informs of actions by Rogue Police in India.

How to register FIR at Police Station ... Download files giving instructions.

How Mumbai Police framed Chhugani .. TOI of 24/07/06 ... Happens across India everyday.

Rogue Police of India ... Narayana Murthy of INFOSYS was also arrested

Citizens Policing the Police is a MUST ...Need of the day

HOME

Corruption in India,Mumbai,happy,health,Corruption,police,delhi,Bombay,chennai,dubai,constittution,
elderly,corruption,control,bangalore,calcutta,pune,lucknow,change,sessions,court,high court,Supreme court,improve,justice,courts,hafta,chhugani,Chhugani, Pratibha Patil,Rajnikant,verdict,criminal,
system,senior citizens,Times of India,High Court,Supreme Court of India,judgement,
Harish Shetty,Shilpa Shetty,Bandra,Khar,Brown Sugar,Drugs,Sindhi,Xavier College,Stephrns College,Starplus,Jethmalani,memon,Dawood,BharatShah,Barkha,ndtv,Bribes,Infosys,Cnn,Aajtak,Zee,Gandhi, Sabharwal,Jessica Lal

girishankar (manager)     30 November 2010

 

RUDIMENTARY LOGIC DEMANDS

that the highest chairs must have the soundest legs.

Story from Tehelka https://www.tehelka.com/story_main47.asp?filename=Ne021010Chief_Injustices.asp

By that measure, judges ought to have impeccable moral character. But in India, judges are protected less by their sterling reputations than by an arcane law: the “contempt of court” act, which prohibits raising any questions about judges or their actions. This has reduced talk of judicial corruption to a sullen whisper rather than a democratic debate.

Supreme Court lawyer Prashant Bhushan has fought this unhealthy immunity for 20 years. In September 2009, partly as a result of his relentless campaigns, the judiciary finally agreed to declare their financial assets. It was a big first step. Much remained to be done. Soon after, in an interview with TEHELKA, Bhushan outlined other mechanisms needed to make judges more accountable and spoke of various forms of judicial corruption. Among other things, he asserted that “half of the last 16 Chief Justices have been corrupt.”

Based on this interview, lawyer Harish Salve slapped a contempt of court case against Bhushan and TEHELKA editor Tarun J Tejpal. At first Bhushan argued his right as a citizen to voice his perceptions. But the court insisted on pursuing the matter further, saying the ramifications of the case for the credibility of the Supreme Court were far greater than those that had been under consideration in either “Duda’s case or Bal Thackeray’s case”. (The former had called the Supreme Court a haven of FERA violators, bride-burners and racketeers; the latter had said, “I piss on the Supreme Court.”)

Pushed to demonstrate that his views were not just reckless assertions, Bhushan has now filed a supplementary affidavit with evidence backing his statement about corrupt judges. In the affidavit, Bhushan reiterates the difficulty in getting documentary evidence of corruption in the higher judiciary because no investigation is allowed against judges, there is no disciplinary authority one can turn to, and even FIRs require prior permission from the Chief Justice of India.

Despite this, his affidavit casts chilling light on the apparent misconduct of many judges. A week earlier, in a historic move, constitutionalist and former law minister Shanti Bhushan also filed an affidavit, seeking to implead himself in the case. Like his son, he asserted eight out of the last 16 Chief Justices have been corrupt and submitted their names in a sealed envelope to the bench. He would consider it a “great honour”, he said, “to spend time in jail for making an effort to get for the people of India an honest and clean 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

RANGANATH MISHRA

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

KN SINGH 
 

KN SINGH

25.11.1991 - 12.12.1991

CHIEF JUSTICE KN Singh 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

AM AHMADI

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.

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

MM PUNCHHI

JUSTICE PUNCHHI had 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

AS ANAND

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

YK SABHARWAL

ON 3 AUGUST 2007, 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.

PHOTO: SHAILENDRA PANDEY

 

I fully endorse Dr.Jayaprakash Narayan of Loksatta's statement that in Judiciary, from Chief Justice to ordinary clerk, there is corruption.

Unlike Dr.Jayaprakash Narayan I have
experienced it personally... Read at:-

https://www.RoguePolice.com/achilya.htm

https://www.RoguePolice.com/cjapex.htm

https://www.RoguePolice.com/supreme.htm

https://www.RoguePolice.com/indjudg.htm

https://www.RoguePolice.com/disgust.htm

You need to go through just one of the above link, to understand how corrupt is our Judiciary. Better if all.

... Indur Chhugani


 
 

Leave a reply

Your are not logged in . Please login to post replies

Click here to Login / Register