This letter of mine is to express my
unflinching support in your endeavor/campaign to get the Superior Judiciary cleansed from Corruption, for which both of you are even being driven to face the Contempt Proceedings.
This support is based on my personal experience of the Corruption prevailing in the Superior Judiciary and is based
on facts and complete truth, and hence it cannot be disputed for its veracity. The well known legal personality and a former solicitor
general of IndiaSC must demonstrate will to correct itself
- The Times of India http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/SC-must-demonstrate-will-to-correct-itself/articleshow/7199068.cms#ixzz19rPyj0st):-
SC must demonstrate will to correct itself.”.
If I am not wrong he was the initiator for the aforesaid Contempt proceedings against Luminary Shri Prashant Bhusanji. While, my experiences are inclined to strongly suggest
that in violation of the constitutional duties, some judges of the Supreme Court were also embraced by a sense of strong egoism,
which is no less than a prelude to corrupt practice.
The Contempt of Court Act, 1971 made interalia following provision
to describe an act as Contempt of the Court. Section 4: (Fair and accurate report of judicial proceeding not contempt), provides
that “Subject to the provisions contained in section 7, a person shall not be guilty of contempt of court for publishing
a fair and accurate report of a judicial proceeding or any stage thereof”, and Section 5: (Fair criticism of judicial
act not contempt), provides that “A person shall not be guilty of contempt of court for publishing any fair comment
on the merits of any case which has been heard and finally decided”, and Section 16: (Contempt by judge, magistrate
or other person acting judicially), provides that “(1) Subject to the provisions of any law for the time being in force,
a judge, magistrate or other person acting judicially shall also be liable for contempt of his own court or of any other court
in the same manner as any other individual is liable and the provisions of this Act shall, so far as may be, apply accordingly.”
In view of the aforesaid provisions and in view of the Affirmation of Oath fixed under Article 124(6) of the Constitution
of India, any statement based on truth cannot be described as Contempt of Court, if made with regard to the Judicial Performance
conducted by the Judges of the Supreme Court. This we are fighting for the past several years. Shri Soli Sorabjee may recall
my sitting for ‘Fast Unto Death’ along with Shri S. D. Sharma of Lok
Sevak Sangh, Gandian and Sarvodayee Shri Avadhesh Kumarji, for our demand for the constitution of ‘Lokpal Institution’
to curb the corruption at high levels, including in the judiciary. In the evening of the 2nd day of our Fast Shri
Soli Sorabjee, along with Shri Rajmohan Gandhi, Justice Rajinder Sachhar and Renowned Columnist: Shrri Kuldip Nayar, came to site of Fast and requested, persuaded and convinced
us to break our Fast. In fact unscrupulous advocates are also responsible for development of the corruption in the Judiciary.
The issue of the ‘Corruption
in the Judiciary’ is also an issue concerning the larger public interests, and thus cannot be muzzled under the threatening
provision of Contempt of the Court, which otherwise amounts to protection of the Judicial Wrong doings. Therefore, any matter
regarding allegation of corruption against any Judge belonging to the Superior Judiciary is not entitled to be protected by
misusing the process of the Contempt of the Court, at the larger cost of reputation of the Fairness of the Judiciary.
In my view there is a valid ground
to differentiate the definition of corruption for the Judges from the Supreme Court from the definition of corruption for
any other Public Servant. Since the impact of the Orders/Judgments of the Superior Judiciary, particularly from the Supreme
Court at times has the same impact as that of havens. Therefore, it is imperative that it is be gauged by ‘Purity of
Fairness’ in its performance. For whatsoever reason, even if the ‘Purity of Fairness’ is affected even by
merely 0.0001%, it comes within the ambit of corruption.
On the barometric scale of my own experiences,
I can say that the Supreme Court of India has been converted into a place to provide shelter for powerful Mafia having nexus
with Powerful Politicians.
Before highlighting the matter regarding
Corruption in Judiciary, I am also mentioning some very good experiences from the Judiciary as well as from the Advocates.
In the year 1983, Justice Anil Sen (as the then he was) of Calcutta High Court, through his colleague Judge(s) got the enquiry
done regarding the allegations leveled by me, which I made just by sending the same by Post against one Judicial Officer from
Alipore Civil Courts. Resultantly, respective Judicial Officer (the then Munsif Mr. Jayanta Kumar Dasgupta), was dismissed
from the judicial service, by Hon’ble Calcutta High Court, as the first such order of dismissal of any Judicial Officer,
in the known judicial history of India.
I was made to live under severe victimization,
and constant threats to lives and liberties caused under close Nexus between Kolkata Land Mafia Sanjay Kumar Jhunjhunwala
and Shri Jyoti Basu, the then Chief Minister of West Bengal. Under the impact of the personal influence emanating from Shri
Jyoti Basu, justice became a nightmare for me in West Bengal, and even at the level of Calcutta High Court. Purely with humanitarian
considerations, the renowned Lawyer of Calcutta High Court, Mr. (Name is withheld), being a friend of Shri A. D. Giri and also friend of my friend, took trouble to accompany me along with my aforesaid
friend to travel all along from Kolkata to Allahabad and apprised the entire matter of my victimization to the Ex-Solicitor
General of India, (during Chandra Shekhar Govt.): Shri A. D. Giri, who in his turn came to Delhi to appoint Mr. Gopal Subramanium,
then a Sr. Lawyer of Supreme Court to get prepared and move my matter before the Supreme Court, because they were just concerned
with the matter on merits of human (fundamental) rights of the common man like me. Considering my deteriorated financial conditions,
Mr. (Name is withheld) and Shri A. D. Giri did not even took any fee from me, as at that point of time, I was no less than
just a beggar.
But thereafter, within 3/4 months under
influence from someone: possibly some agent of the said Kolkata Land Mafia, Mr. Gopal Subramanium, with the help of Mr. S.
Murlidhar (now Judge in Delhi High Court) played a game plan and betrayed me, even after taking advance fees which was duly
receipted. Now a question arises, very much concerning the professional probity, that when Mr. Gopal Subramanium, can betray
an individual person like me, then how he can maintain his honesty/probity in the matters of larger public interests, while
holding the Important Office of the Additional Solicitor General of India or Solicitor General of India. Certainly there is
every doubt that he might also have played somewhere as one of the instruments for the growth of the corruption in the superior
My experience with regard to the corruption
in Supreme Court dates back to days when Justice A. M. Ahmadi was CJI. In the year of 1997, Justice A. M. Ahmadi, decided
to deprive the Petitioner-in-person like me, and misguided all of his then Colleague Judges, thus without having any Constitutional
Powers or Authority, through backdoor and unconstitutionally amended the Constitution, by amending the Supreme Court Rules,
thus unconstitutionally assigned the Constitutional Powers of Supreme Court to Supreme Court Registrar(s) to selectively refuse
to Register a Writ Petition, if filed against any influential and powerful, committing severe violation of the Six Judge Bench
Judgment: (AIR:1950,Sc: 124, Kania CJ, Fazl Ali, Patanjali Sastri,
Mahajan, B.K.Mokherjea, And Das JJ.), that: “The Supreme Court is thus constituted the protector and guarantor of
fundamental rights, and it cannot, consistently with the responsibility so laid upon it, refuse to entertain applications
seeking protection against infringement of such rights”), and
postponed the Fundamental Rights to Move Supreme Court by a person like me, in violation of Article 32 of the Constitution
Owing to my background,
I have always acted in furtherance to champion the cause for larger public interests, and had never compromised, for any benefit
at the cost of principles and the larger public interests. Since my childhood, I have received Jain Teachings in my breathings
from the various Jain Saints including the Universally Renowned Philosopher (as
was recognized by the then President of India Dr. S. Radhakrishnan), Coauthor of an important Book with Dr. A. P. J. Kalam,
Jain Saint (who was also my grand uncle) Acharya Mahapragnyaji (His Holiness’s family name was Nathmal son of Late Tolaram
Some of the Writ Petitions filed by me, if admitted could have
resulted in a completely different situation of the Country that has been:-
When, in 1986 under a plot hatched by the said Kolkata Land Mafia a severe attempt to murder me by
inflicting some 42 stab-wounds on my body and again in 1991, after having connived with the Police a Truck Accident was staged
to kill my young son of 18 year’s age, as a result of which by God’s grace who was able to walk again on his own
legs, only after undergoing 22 major operations in Kolkata and Delhi, that lasted for about 30 months, and when my number
of counsels including the renowned Lawyers, viz. Learned Mr. Bankim Chandra Dutta, Advocate, Ld. Mr. P. K. Ray, Bar-at-law,
Ballygunge Circular Road, Kolkata, Ld. Mr. Bhaskar Sen, Bar-at-law, 147, Shyama Prasad Mukherjee Road, Kolkata-700026, Mr.
Pradeep Kumar Ghosh, Bar-at-law, 25, Harish Mukherjee Road, Kolkata-700020, Mr. M. R. Chowdhury, Advocate, 12, Old Post Office
Street, Kolkata-700001, Smt. Maity Ghosh, Advocate, 12/1, Old Post Office Street, Kolkata-700001, Ld. Mr. C. K. Jain, Solicitors,
7C, Kiran Shankar Roy Road, Kolkata-700001, and several other Advocates were influenced to sabotage the Court proceedings
relating to my cases and respective judges were embraced on behalf of the said Kolkata Land Mafia under influence caused on
behalf of Shri Jyoti Basu through Mr. Pratap Chatterjee, Bar-at-law (son of Sri Somnath Chatterjee, the then CPI(M) M.P.),
and when Mr. Gopal Subramanium, also betrayed me, I was left with no other option, but compelled to take a decision to move
my Writ Petitions as Petitioner-in-Person, as and when it became necessary in future.
In the meantime on 2nd August, 1995, Vohra Committee Report was published on
the subject of Politico-Crime-Nexus. Since I was a severe victim of the similar Nexus, and as I had the first-hand experience
about the root cause of the Nexus between Politico-Crime-Nexus, as such in the light of severe atrocities inflicted upon me
and also in consideration of such root causes behind such situations, I decided to file Public Interest Litigations, which
none the less in turn could also help me to protect my own fundamental Rights as well. As such on 9th August 1995,
I filed a Writ Petition based on the aforesaid Vohra Committee Report against the Union of India and the Election Commission
of India as Public Interest Litigation as Writ Petition (Civil) No.559/95 with interalia following prayers: -
i) ISSUE direction
to Union of India to make appropriate law in compliance of Constitution of India restricting entry of criminals into the politics
by participating in the Election process to become the members of Parliament or State Legislative Assembly of any State;
ii) ISSUE direction to Election Commission of India to evolve a method to restrict the
candidature of a person, facing criminal proceedings in any Court of Law, for the Membership of Parliament or State Legislative
Assemblies and after due approval from this Hon’ble Court, impose the same for future elections till the Union of India
makes Law; as prayed for under prayer No. i) hereinabove.
under paragraph 14 of the Writ Petition interalia I made following suggestions:-
a) No person can contest Election for Parliament or State Assembly, if he is accused in any criminal proceedings
and Police prima-facie had satisfied with the complaint by filing charge sheet, till he not discharged or acquitted from such
criminal case by a Court of Law;
b) No person can contest Election for Parliament or State Assembly, unless he declares all the properties
and business of his family members, before the Law Commission;
c) The Members of Parliament and / or State Legislative Assemblies should be defined as Public Servants
under all criminal laws.
That on 29th August 1995 I moved the said Writ Petition as Petitioner-in-person before the
Hon’ble Chief Justice’s Court presided by A. M. Ahmadi, C.J. as then was, and after hearing the same Hon’ble
Court, dismissed the said Writ Petition with verbal observations that Court can’t do anything in such matter, relating
to issue of Policy. But, after few days later Hon’ble Chief Justice’s Court presided by A. M. Ahmadi, C.J.I. as
then he was, admitted another Writ Petition based on self-same Vohra Committee Report, registered as Civil Writ Petition No.664/95
filed by Mr. Dinesh Trivedy, M. P., (now Union Minister in UPA-2 Government, from Mamta Banerjee’s Trinamul Congress
Party) and moved by some renowned Lawyers of the Supreme Court, including Sri Shanti Bhusanji and Sri Ram Jethmalani. Admission
of such subsequent Writ Petition was not consistent with the prevailing principle of the finality of final order of the Supreme
Court, though which in my view also cannot be made applicable in respect of any Writ Petition filed under Article 32 of the
Constitution, which I will explain later on.
After knowing the facts relating to such admission of another Writ, on 1st December 1995,
I filed another Writ Petition (Civil) No. D-18372/95 with prayers interalia that in compliance of clause (4) of Article 32
of the Constitution of India the Jurisdiction of Supreme Court has been seized to dismiss any Writ Petition filed as remedy
for enforcement of Fundamental Rights, without hearing on the merit. On 29th January 1996 the said Writ Petition
(Civil) No. D-18372/95 was listed for hearing along with the said Civil Writ Petition No. 664/95, Hon’ble Chief Justice’s
Court presided by A. M. Ahmadi, C.J. as then he was, accepted the argument forwarded by me and observed that they are not
dismissing rather disposing off the same by passing judicial order. When the Hon’ble Court was dictating the said order,
Learned Mr. Rajiv Dhavan, Sr. Advocate Supreme Court stood up and wanted to know the fate of Third Writ Petition filed by
his client and moved by him, on the same issue, Hon’ble Court observed that all other petitions would face the same
fate. Then Learned Mr. Rajiv Dhavan, objected it, which was supported by Ld. Mr. Ram Jethmalani, Sr. Lawyer, then Hon’ble
Court observed that in such event Mr. Choraria’s Petition would also be heard together with all other Petitions relating
to the same matter in issue. But, this subsequent order was not found in the certified copy of the Order of the day. As such
after going through the said certified copy of the said order, I placed the matter in the notice of the Hon’ble Court
by filing Third Writ Petition (Civil) D-2595/96 on 12th February 1996. But, on 11th March 1996 Hon’ble
Chief Justice’s Court dismissed the Petition, without describing any reason.
That on 6th December 1995, I filed another Public Interest Litigation as Writ Petition (Criminal)
No.3/96, with the interalia following prayers: -
Issue direction to the Respondent No.1 to 8 (therein) to make their respective Reports and facts lying with their Departments/Sub-ordinates
relating to the matters referred under Annexure ‘D’ to ‘N’, before Hon’ble Court for appropriate
direction, declaration or order;
Issue direction to the Respondent No.6 (therein) (Central Bureau of Investigation) to investigate in the matter referred under
Annexure ‘O’ and ‘P’ hereinabove and (to) submit its Report before Hon’ble Court for appropriate
direction or declaration or order;
Issue direction to the Respondent No.8 (therein) (Calcutta Municipal Corporation) not to issue completion certificate with
regards to constructions are made at the Premises No.5/1/1A and 5/1/1B, Cornfield Road, Calcutta, till final hearing of the
said Writ Petition, was also Public Interest Litigation, but due to lack of experiences, I submitted in Paragraph 6 in the
4th line at page 14 of the Petition, interalia that “The I crave leave to file a separate Writ Petition
for appropriate reliefs for himself (myself therein) as such for the brevity he is not mentioning all details relates to his
victimization, but just to support his pleadings he annexed herewith the photo-copies of the following communications without
their annexures,”. When on 19th January 1996 Writ Petition was listed before the Hon’ble Court
presided by G. N. Ray J, as then he was, and after hearing of the same G. N. Ray J, observed that this leave appears that
the matters referred in the Writ Petition have been clubbed the matters of the public interest with the matter of infringement
of my own fundamental rights, and observed and advised that I should withdraw my Writ Petition to file a fresh Writ Petition.
In considerations of such observations I withdrew my said Writ Petition to file a fresh.
That on 7th February 1996 I filed a Public Interest Litigation being Writ Petition (Civil)
No. 151/96 with the prayers interalia as follows: -
q MAKE, necessary
Rules under sub-clause (c ) Under Clause (1) Under Article 145 for filing of Writ Petition definable as “appropriate
proceedings” of the Civil in nature in compliance of clause (1) of Article 32 to ensure that the right to remedy for
enforcement of the Fundamental Rights is guaranteed and to ensure the hearing of the matters relating to violation of Fundamental
Rights on merit’
q ISSUE, directions
to the STATE to make appropriate change and/or amendment in law within one year as suggested under Schedule “A”
therein drafts of the amendments or change,
or replacements of the following Laws were referred under Schedule of the Writ Petition: -
of People Act;
197 of Criminal Procedure Code;
c) Official Secrets Act
New Model of Civil Procedure Code
e) Rules under Sub-Clause (c ) Clause (1) of Article 145 of the Constitution
of India to define “appropriate proceedings for Civil Reliefs”
That with regards to detailed “New Model of Civil Procedure Code’
I am submitting here that in 1983, under my own original thoughts, based on practical study through records of more than 250
Civil Cases, I innovated a new Model of Civil Procedure Code and forwarded to the then Law Minister of India Shri Asok Sen,
by Registered Post. Then on 3rd March 1995 I also forwarded it to A. M. Ahmadi, CJ, as then he was, by Registered
Post. I have also mentioned the respective draft of a New Model of Civil Procedure Code in detail in my said Writ Petition.
On 29th March 1996 upon hearing of the Petition Hon’ble Chief Justice’s Court presided by A. M. Ahmadi
C.J. as then he was, observed that I has done a very good work and advised me to forward my model of new Civil Procedure Code
to the Chairman of the Law Commission of India, even mentioning reference of such observations. I forwarded the same by Letter
dated 6th June 1996 by Registered Post to the Hon’ble Chairman of the Law Commission of India. However, in
the said Writ Petition Order was also passed indicating that Hon’ble Chief Justice of India Administrative Side will
consider the matter regarding procedures for PIL’s, although such order was not having any relevance with the Writ Petition.
However, now Information collected under Right to Information Act, it transpires that the said petition was never seen in
future by the Hon’ble Chief Justice of India Administrative Side. It also transpires that during the same period (possibly
impressed from my suggestion) Justice Ahmadi appointed a Committee headed by Sri Abhishek Manu Singhvi to made recommendations
on the same issue regarding Civil Procedure Code and then he along with said Sri Abhishek Manu Singhvi, also wrote an article,
which was published in a Law Magazine of USA. But, information collected under RTI Act, no record was available about appointment
of such Committee and nor anything about such article, indicating that everything was conducted at the private level, while
at the same time advising me to send my aforesaid suggestion to the Law Commission of India which was not at all fair, when
Justice Ahmadi himself was active on the same issue at the same time.
That on 20th March 1996, I
filed a Petition before the Election Commission of India that in consideration of Article 324 (1) read with Article 326 of
the Constitution “Commission invite following information on oath or affirmation from the intending candidates for such
elections to furnish along with nomination papers: -
(a) Whether any Criminal Proceeding in any Court of law is pending? if yes ; please state:
(i) Name of the Police Station, within Constituency or outside the Constituency ;
(ii) Number of Crime in respective Police Station?
(iii) Date of Crime according to F.I.R. registered in Police Station ?
(iv) reference of law under which crime is registered ?
(b) Whether, Charge Sheet is filed by the investigating authority in the above referred Crime Number? If,
yes, please state: -
(i) Name of the Court, in which charge sheet is filed?
(ii) Number of the Crime Registered in the Court?
(iii) Date of Charge Sheet?
(iv) Reference of Law under which Charge Sheet is filed?
(c) The present status of the proceedings?
(d) If the Criminal Proceedings are pending more than one, similar
informations should be provided in respect of each such proceeding.”
receipt of the said Petition Election Commission, in 1998 issued a Notification asking the intending candidates to give certain
details with reference to criminal cases, if pending or disposed off against them.
in considerations of the proceedings held in the aforesaid Writ Petitions, on 15th May 1996 I filed Writ Petition
(Civil) No. D-8304/96, in which Justice Ahmadi was made as Respondent. On the same day i.e. 15th May 1996 I also
filed another Writ Petition (Civil) No. D-8305/96 praying therein interalia to issue Directions upon the Election Commission
of India interalia to suspend and / or withheld the name of any person from the Electoral Rolls, if he is an accused in any
Criminal Proceeding and Investigating Authority Prima-facie satisfied about his crime by filing Charge Sheet, till he will
be not declared innocent person by a Court of Law, immediately after such information about such Criminal Proceedings received
by the Commission. (Ironically, similar recommendations are now being made by the present CECI)
in consideration of withdrawal of my said earlier Writ Petition (Criminal) No.3/96 from the Hon’ble Court, under the
aforesaid observations made on 19th January 1996 by Justice G. N. Ray, on 21st May 1996 I filed a fresh
Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 8495/96, with object to get restored my Rights to Remedies against blackmailing activities run
by the said Kolkata Land Mafia and his associates, with interalia following prayers: -
a) ISSUE, directions to the Respondent Nos. 1 to 8 (as named therein) to take corrective measures in respect
of all illegal Orders, Directions, Notifications, Contracts, Agreements, Sanction or otherwise issued in favour of any of
the Company of the Respondent (therein) No.9 his relations or associates under the signature of any authority of the Respondent
(therein) No.1 to 8 by disobeying the directions of the law for the pecuniary advantage of the Respondent (therein) No.9;
b) ISSUE, directions to appoint an Court Commissioner to go through all documents relating to all matters
referred in the Writ Petition and submit its report before the Hon’ble Court with the list of the Public Servants who
are responsible for the disobedience of the directions of the Law for appropriate directions by the Hon’ble Court;
That as per my knowledge withdrawal of earlier Writ Petition (Criminal) No.3/96
without any contest was liable to be termed as non-exist/non-est or non-filed. As such, when I filed, fresh Writ Petition
(Criminal) No.D-8495/96, I did not mention any reference with regards to withdrawal of the said Writ Petition (Criminal) No.3/96,
nor I made any false statement. Writ Petition (Criminal) No.D-8495/96 should have been listed before the same Court, wherefrom
earlier Writ Petition was withdrawn. But, the said Writ Petition was listed before the Court headed by Dr. A. S. Anand, J.
as then his Lordship was. In another Writ Petition (Civil) No. D-8304/96 A.M.Ahmadi, C.J., as then he was, was made sole respondent,
which was dismissed on 5th August 1996 along with Writ Petition (Criminal) No.D-8495/96, by a bench headed by Dr.
A. S. Anand, J. as then his Lordship was. Hence, Judicial Fairness in the Supreme Court as a matter of deep and fair study,
is the need of the hour.
To cite the matter of
severe corruption in the Supreme Court, I may be
allowed to refer matter regarding unconstitutionally refusal to register my Writ
Petition (C) No.D-22474/2003, filed on 29.10.2003, with supporting documentary evidences, with references to atrocities suffered
by me, and for restoration of my fundamental rights, which were infringed severally due to the aforesaid Nexus. I filed the
said Writ Petition, interalia with the following prayers, for issuance of writ or writs of certiorari or Mandamus
or any other appropriate decree, writ, declaration, direction or order interalia holding that:
Jurisdiction and powers of the Supreme
Court including the powers of interpretation in respect of Part III of the Constitution of India is clearly and exclusively
referred, defined, derived, vested and can be inferred from Clause (1), (2) and (4) of Article 32 of the Constitution of India
itself and cannot be imported from Chapter IV Part V of the Constitution or from anywhere else;
b) The Rule 5 Under Order XVIII of the Supreme Court Rules 1966
(substituted by G.S.R. 407 (w.e.f. 20-12-1997) (Petitions generally) is void as far as its applicability in respect of the
Petition under Article 32 of the Constitution is concerned.
Item No. 65 under Part –V (Suit
Relating to Immovable Property) under the Schedule for the Period of Limitations under section 2(j) and 3 of the Limitation
Act, 1963 are completely inconsistent to Part III of the Constitution and under Article 13 of the Constitution should be declared
The Prayers d) to h) are interconnected with prayers a) to c) and thus I am not reproducing
here, while by prayer i) I have taken full responsibility to prove validity of my Writ Petition thus prayed before the Hon’ble
Supreme Court that “Upon hearing on merit, if Writ Petition proved as vicious or based on frivolous or contains scandalous
matters, Petitioner shall be punished for misuse of rights to remedy.”
The Gist of the Explanation
of prayers a) to c), mentioned in the Writ Petition is as under:-
With regard to Prayer a):-
Supreme Court has no powers and jurisdiction to make interpretation under Chapter IV Part V, including Article 147 of the
Constitution, particularly with regard to Fundamental Rights guaranteed under Part III of the Constitution of India, since
the powers and jurisdiction of interpretation in respect of Part III of the Constitution of India is separately and exclusively
referred, defined, derived, vested and can be inferred from Clause (1), (2) and (4) of Article 32 of the Constitution of India
itself, which I have described in detail, in my said Writ Petition.
instance one such ground was that ‘from the language of provision provided under Article 147 of the Constitution it
is amply clear that the Supreme Court is empowered to make interpretation with reference “In this Chapter and Chapter
V of Part VI, references to any substantial question of law as to the interpretation of this Constitution shall be construed
as including references to any substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the Government of India Act, 1935”…
“or of any Order in Council or order made thereunder, or of the Indian Independence Act, 1947, or of any order made
thereunder”. From the words “In this Chapter and, Chapter V of Part VI,” that Part III of the
Constitution is not included in the scope, meaning and ambit of the interpretation under Article 147 of the Constitution.
from the aforesaid language of Article 147 of the Constitution, from the factual position this is further clear that “The
Fundamental Rights” never existed in the Government of India Act, 1935 nor were subject matter of the orders passed
by any “Council” whether the word “Council” denotes to British Privy Council or the then Indian Parliament,
nor were subject matter of the Indian Independence Act, 1947, which was enacted as per agreement between the Indian National
Congress and British Government, based on the proposal of the Cabinet Mission from the British Government, nor it is inferred
from any provision that Supreme Court is empowered to change meaning of any provision of the Part III of the Constitution.
Therefore, Article 147 of the Constitution does not include the Powers of the Supreme Court to make interpretation of substantial
question of Law in respect of the Provisions provided under Part III of the Constitution. Such Power is included in the provision
of the Article 32 of the Constitution itself, and cannot be inferred from anywhere else. And that inconsistency or contravention
between Article 13 under Part III with Article 147 under Chapter IV of Part V of the Constitution is clearly apparent from
the factual position that Article 13 of the Constitution empowers the Supreme Court to declare “All laws in force
in the territory of India immediately before the commencement of this Constitution, (means inclusive of the Government
of India Act, 1935 and Indian Independence Act, 1947) in so far as they are inconsistent with the provision with the provision
of this Part, shall to the extent of such inconsistency, (can) be (declared) void”, from which it
is amply clear that the Supreme Court has been empowered even to declare any part of the “Government of India Act, 1935
or Indian Independence Act, 1947” if found to be inconsistent with the provision of Part III, to the extent of such
inconsistency, as void”. From this it is further clear that efficacy of the Article 13 of the Constitution is much superior
than the Article 147 of the Constitution, and that the interpretation of Article 13 of the Constitution cannot and should
not be construed as the interpretation of the Government of India Act, 1935, or of any Order in Council or order made there
under, or of the Indian Independence Act, 1947. From the aforesaid situation concept of separate, independent and untrammeled
two responsibilities of Supreme Courts is clearly apparent. Thus the principle of the finality of the final orders of the
Supreme Court arrived or inferred under Article 147 of the Constitution cannot and should not be made applicable in respect
of Part III of the Constitution.
Explanation with regard to prayer b):-
The amendment made in the Rule 5 Under Order XVIII of the Supreme Court Rules 1966 (substituted by
G.S.R. 407 (w.e.f. 20-12-1997) (Petitions generally) is void as far as its applicability in respect of the Petition under
Article 32 of the Constitution is concerned, since it unconstitutionally assigned the powers of the Supreme Court to Registrars,
as already explained, and wide-opened the gates for corruption in the Supreme Court Registry to play with the fundamental
rights of citizen under gratification or influence, as it happened with me.
With regard to prayer c):-
Item No. 65 under Part –V (Suit Relating to Immovable Property) under the Schedule for the Period
of Limitations under section 2(j) and 3 of the Limitation Act, 1963 are completely inconsistent to Part III of the Constitution
and should have been declared as void under Article 13 of the Constitution. This law was a creation of the Dominion Government,
when the Citizen had no Fundamental Rights and Duties. This law is the root cause for development of Land Mafiadom in the
Country. Without going into the details, I may be allowed to cite a Supreme Court Judgment, which virtually supports the principle
about the concept made in my aforesaid prayer. On 23rd September, 2008,
in Civil Appeal No. 1196 of 2007, Justices Dalveer Bhandari and H. S. Bedi wanted from the Government to change the law that
gives ownership rights to one who has usurped a property by squatting after ousting the real owners. But till date, under
influence of powerful, particularly those are grabbers of private and public properties, Government, did not take any initiative
to change the respective law;
my said Writ Petition, was refused to be registered, as a Writ Petition, by Order dated 26.05.2004 by the Supreme Court Registry
by misusing the aforesaid unconstitutional Rule, which was amended unconstitutionally in 1997, after taking six months time
in preparation of voluminous file notings (I received photocopy of the file notings under RTI Act). Recently, with the hope,
that Hon'ble CJI Mr. Justice S.H. Kapadia, may correct aforesaid unconstitutional refusal and ensure registration
of my Writ Petition, I sent some Letters to His Lordship. But, I received a reply from SC Registry that ‘no action can
be taken on it as it is not in accordance with the Provision of the Supreme Court Rules’, ignoring the fact that such
Rules were inserted unconstitutionally and the Constitutional validity of the same were under challenge in the aforesaid Writ
Petition. Whether Supreme Court could have allowed the Supreme Court Registrar(s) to refuse a Writ Petition, if it could have
been filed by the influential people like Mr. Ratan Tata or Mr. Anil Ambani? As per information received under RTI Act, 2005,
it can be claimed that only my single Writ Petition (Not the PILs), which was filed for restoration of my infringed fundamental
rights was refused to register by Supreme Court registry, since it was also going to expose the Corruption in the Judiciary.
Some Facts regarding my measurable sufferings, which were also
mentioned in the aforesaid Writ Petition:-
In 1990 Mr. Sanjay Kumar Jhunjhunwala, filed a defamation Suit before Calcutta High Court, against
me, since, in my each and every representation, I have started mentioning him as “Calcutta Land Mafia”. His brief
was accepted by my Long Time Counsel Ld. Mr. P. K. Ray, Bar-at-law, in violation of Advocates Act, under influence from Mr.
Pratap Chatterjee, son of Shri Somnath Chatterjee, then CPI(M) M.P., and obtained an unconstitutional Injunction Order, against
me. After knew about the same, I sent protest letter to Mr. Ray and also submitted application for according sanction for
prosecution of the respective Judges. Then new Counsel was appointed by Mr. Jhunjhunwala and after my appearing in the matter
Injunction Order was modified substantially. Subsequently Mr. Sanjay Kumar Jhunjhunwala also filed a Contempt Petition and
obtained Rule-Nisi in the matter by filing a false affidavit of Service. After knew about the same, I filed application under
Section 340 Cr. P. C., and the Hon’ble High Court was pleased to pass the Order that the aforesaid Contempt Petition
filed by Mr. Sanjay Kumar Jhunjhunwala and my said application under Section 340 of Cr. P. C., would be heard analogously.
Then Mr. Sanjay Kumar Jhunjhunwala, understood that his jail is sure, as such by misusing his black money and muscle powers
and support from Government Machinery, compelled me to flee from Kolkata, which was also published as News item in the Amrita
Bazar Patrika dated 15th November, 1994, under heading Basu accused of misappropriation. However, between 3rd
March, 2006 and 15th March, 2006, when someone being corrupt personnel from the Directorate of Income Tax (Inv.),
Kolkata informed Mr. Sanjay Kumar Jhunjhunwala, that I am collecting information under RTI Act, to know that what action had
been taken on my complaints, then on 16th March, 2006, he hurriedly withdrew his said defamation Suit, which was
pending since 17 years after the said order for analogous hearing.
That after going through one of my representation Learned Mr. Rajiv Dhavan, Sr. Advocate Supreme Court
by his letter dated 4th December 1995 replied that “Many thanks for your letter, which combines juristic
concern with the intensity of one having suffered personal atrocity”.
in fact I had written several letters to the Central Vigilance Commission, in respect of Criminal misconduct adopted by the
Income Tax Department (by inaction against huge Tax Evasion) and the Railway Authority (by inaction against encroachment of
valuable Railway Land) for the gain and benefit of the said Kolkata Land Mafia and his associates. In response to one of my
letter dated 21st October 1996 the then Secretary of the Central Vigilance Commission Mr. Bhure Lal through his
Private Secretary through Memo letter Secy/Com/96 dated 6th November 1996, called me. I appeared before Shri Bhurelal
and placed more than 50 documents before him, which I also referred in my Letter dated 16th December 1996 sent
by Registered post to CVC. However, during hearing and after going through the documents and satisfying with arguments forwarded
by me, in my presence, Mr. Bhure Lal called one of his subordinate Mr. Vishvapavan Pati, and dictated him an order for appropriate
actions. But thereafter Commission became mum, for the reasons best known to it.
on 20th February 1997 one advertisement was published in Hindi Dainik Jansata, Kolkata issue, by one Mr. Samar
Nag Managing Director of M/S. Shelter Properties Developers P.Ltd. of BA-2, Sector-I, Salt Lake City, Kolkata in such a way
as if it was published by an Advocate by stating as “My clients” but name of Advocate was missing from the entire
advertisement. The detail of the properties which was referred in the advertisement was belonged to me. At the last of the
advertisement one Telephone number was referred for contact, which was contact number of one Manik Chand Sethia. After enquiry
it was reported that said Company was Benami and was belongs to Mr. Chandan Basu, son of Shri Jyoti Basu. Under influence
from Shri Jyoti Basu, Company though then having its authorised capital just of Rs. 50 Lacs, but gets Loans of Rs. 50 Lacs
from Life Insurance Corporation and Rs.300 Lacs (Rs.3 Crores) from Peerless Abasan Finance Ltd., in severe violations of Reserve
Bank Guidelines. This was also reported me that said Mr. Manik Chand Sethia through his criminal agent on local notorious
Baman Bose alias Chandan Bose stolen goods from my Office. I sent my written First Information Report dated 27th
November 1999 by Registered Post to the Behala P. S. (Kolkata). But, no action was taken.
the said Kolkata Land Mafia was and is still using black money powers against me, because CBDT and Income Tax Department not
taking appropriate actions against his black money. As per the reports from the local, this was reported me that the said
Mafiadom was entered in an agreement with antisocial to kill me. This cannot be proved unless concerned antisocial were nabbed
by the Police. But, another associate of Kolkata Land Mafia: Sanjay Kumar Jhunjhunwala viz. said Mr. Manik Chand Sethia conveyed
his threats to me admitting before one Mina Lal Bhansali, of 100/1, BBRB Road, Kolkata-700001 that “he (Mr. Manik Chand
Sethia) has paid Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees five Lakhs) to adjudged Cheat Chittranjan Ganguly and also paid Rs.3,00,000/- (Rupees
Three Lakhs) to one local anti-socials out of total agreed payment of Rs.10,00,000/- (Rupees ten lakhs), fixed with the object
to grab my properties. Said Shri Mina Lal Bhansali conveyed me the said threat to me in the first week of February 2001 and
advised me to compromise with the said Mafiadom. As such I placed such information on record by sending my Letter dated 17th
February 2001 by Registered Post to Shri Mina Lal Bhansali, with copy to said Mr. Manik Chand Sethia. This is needless to
mention here that reportedly said Mr. Manik Chand Sethia was the front men of Shri Chandan Basu, son of Shri Jyoti Basu, the
then Chief Minister of West Bengal. In fact on behalf of Mr. Manik Chand Sethia several persons time and again approached
me including Hukum Chand Choraria, Bijay Singh Choraria son of Late Manik Chand Choraria, Chatter Singh Chhajer, and also
owner of Good luck Curriers.
That under the help, support and protections from Shri Jyoti Basu, State of West Bengal not taken any
action against the criminals in the several criminal cases related to criminal acts by criminal means caused and committed
against me, including which were referred in Behala Police Station
(South 24-Parganas District, under West Bengal Police) Case Nos. 38(7)83 dated 14th July 1983, 91(12)83 dated 29th
December 1983, 106(2)84 dated 29th February 1984, 4(3)84 dated 2nd March 1984, 54(2)85 dated 19th
February 1985, 67(7)86 dated 18th July 1986, Sec. VZ. C/No. 30 dated 22nd February 1991 of the New Alipore
Police Station (under Kolkata Police), First Information Report dated 18th October 1994 and dated 21st
January 1995 both lodged by Registered Post to Golabari Police Station (Howrah District- under West Bengal Police), First
Information Report dated 27th November 1999 Lodged by Registered Post to Behala Police Station (South 24-Parganas
District, under West Bengal Police) against demolition of the boundrywall and stolen the Goods and also made my lives and liberties miserable.
That one Senior Correspondence of the English Daily from Kolkata namely Amrita
Bazaar Patrika shown courage to publish News about my sufferings under heading “BASU ACCUSED OF MISAPPROPRIATION”,
with reference to measurable situation of severe magnitude which compelled me and my family members to flee from Kolkata,
in it’s issue dated 15th November 1994. The owner of the Newspaper Amrita Bazaar Patrika was compelled to
terminate the said Senior Journalist within 24 hours from the said News was published. In fact I acquired a small flat at
9th Floor, at 45, Moulana Abdul Kalam Azad Road, Howrah-711001, under agreement. But, immediately after the said
News published on 15th November 1994, in or around goods worth Rs.67,960/- were stolen by one anti-social Pawan
Kumar Jaiswal from the said flat, and under the plot hatched by the Kolkata Land Mafia and his associates dispossessed me
from the said flat with the help of such anti-socials, who acted as agent of said Kolkata Land Mafia. In this respect First
Information Report dated 21st January 1995 was forwarded to Officer-in-Charge, Golabari Police Station, against
goods stolen, and letter of the same date was also forwarded to the then Union Home Secretary Shri K. Padmanabhaiyya, and
letter dated 24th January 1995 to the Home Secretary, West Bengal, against threats to my lives and liberties.
That sometimes in April 1995 Ms. Mamta Banerjee, M. P. given my matter to the
Special Correspondent of the Bengali Daily Newspaper Baratman, Mr. Jayanto Ghosal, who is now in Ananda Bazar Patrika. Said
Reporter spent 4 days time with me to study the matter and after preparation of News send it to his Newspaper at Kolkata to
publish the story. But when I was expecting the News relates to my said matter, interviews of Mr. Vijoy Fatehpuria was published
on 7th May 1995 in the Baratman. Said Special Correspondent informed me that his Office conveyed him not to deal
with the matter further. However, he got published the matter in Bengali weekly Coalfield Times 15-21 May 1995 with reference
to atrocities suffered by me and my family members, and published with Photo of Shri Jyoti Basu and his son Chandan Basu.
That on 6th April 1995 one Shri Rasha Singh Rawat, M.P. send one of my representation to Shri P. V. Narsimha Rao,
the then Prime Minister of India for appropriate action. But, no action was appeared.
in search of one Senior Lawyer, in or in the month of April 1995, I sent a stereo typed letter to about Hundred Senior Lawyers
from Supreme Court, which inadvertently was also posted to Shri Gopal Subramanium, due to mistake. Shri Gopal Subramanium
replied by his Letter dated 8th May 1995 that if I can convince him that I am a ‘genuine litigant’ then he can take-up my case. Receiving such letter with such surprising
remarks just after few month from the said Draft forwarded by him, I was surprised and shocked and wrote back on 17th
May 1995 that I have apprehensions that my opposite parties must have approached to Shri Gopal Subramanium, otherwise after
knowing the matters relates to infringement of my fundamental rights, he should not have questioned my genuinity, since earlier,
he only after satisfied about the merit of the matter prepared the said draft. In reply thereof Shri Gopal Subramanium, by
his Letter dated 23rd May 1995 admitted that “As far as the merit your matter is concerned
I am prima facie satisfied that there is a cause of action at least to file a Writ Petition under Article 32 of the Constitution
of India for appropriate reliefs.”, However, in the said
letter he also asked me to offer him a written apology and withdraw the aforesaid sentence referred in my letter, he would
be in a position to advise me appropriately further in the matter. But, since I have committed nothing wrong, rather Shri
Gopal Subramanium was at fault by raising question about my genuinely, as such I not tendered any apology.
as stated hereinbefore that I acquired a small flat at 45, M. A. K. Azad Road, Howrah-711001, under a agreement. But, under
the aforesaid criminal plot I was dispossessed from the said flat with the help of anti-socials. In this respect, on 21st
January 1995, I send a Petition to the Union Home Ministry. After receipt of the said Petition, Union Home Ministry directed
to State of West Bengal, but no security was provided to me and my property. In this respect Petition I also send Letter dated
8th April 1995 to District Magistrate, Howrah.
Actually my such suffering from severe victimization was caused due to open misuse of powers and abuse
of the authority, and also open misuse of Government Machinery of the respective Departments of Government of West Bengal,
Police and Kalkota Municipal Corporation to support his blackmailing activities prevailed under clear Nexus between Shri Jyoti
Basu and said Kolkata Land Mafia Sanjay Kumar Jhunjhunwala. I am citing some examples to prove that said Kolkata Land Mafia
was so influential and dare to violate the Law in his favour. For
instance, the important English daily from Kolkata: the Statesman published a
large story in its two issues 2nd November 1995 and 3rd November 1995 under separate headings “CMC
gifts 50 cottas to promoter” and “Promoter pays politicians, Govt. staff to get project going”. But, nothing
happened against him, for such crime.
I can also cite another important example, strong cemented Nexus between Shri
Jyoti Basu and Mafia Group. Sometime in October 1994, one of the relation of said Kolkata Land Mafia, viz. Mr. Kedar Nath
Fatehpuria used anti-socials to get vacate a large property namely called as Alexandra Buildings, a prime property, situated
at Jawahar Lal Nehru Road, Kolkata, who hurled Bombs upon the residents. Even after repeated calls, when Police from Bhawanipore
Police Station (Kolkata) did not turned up, then one resident, who was personally known to Mr. Arun Bhagat, the then Director
of Central Bureau of Investigation in Delhi, and conveyed him the terrible situation developed there. In his turn Mr. Arun
Bhagat telephoned to Mr. Manish Gupta, the then Home Secretary of West Bengal about the situation. Thereafter under his instructions,
the Lal Bazar H. Q. of Kolkata Police arrested Mr. Fatehpuria, but in the midnight, one W. B. Minister Matish Ray personally
(there are reason to believe that he was under instructions from Shri Jyoti Basu) come to Bhawanipore Police Station and arranged
his Bail from a Criminal Case which was registered under Non-Bail-able sections. Subsequently Officer-in-Charge of the Police
Station was made scapegoat for illegal release of Mr. Fatehpuria. The story was stated me by the person, who himself telephoned
to Mr. Arun Bhagat, and he also informed that subsequently Mr. Manish Gupta started working for settlement between Mr. Fatehpuria
and the residents. In considerations of such informations, I sent my protest letter to Mr. Manish Gupta, the then Home Secretary
of West Bengal. News about arrest of Mr. Fatehpuria and reaching of Minister at Police Station were on 4th and
5th October 1994, in Bengali Daily Newspapers (Photocopy of the same
are in my possession). I was interested in the matter, because I was victim from the same Mafia group.
of this Letter to All the Hon’ble Judges of Supreme Court and all other persons named herein.