CLICK BELOW 2 READ MY SOCIAL PROFILE
Since childhood I am active against corruption, and on the basis of my own experience I can submit that the Corruption or
Probity both are moving or continuously can prevails from top, not from lower level. What I have done with great pain for
the larger National Interests and Public importance, if I could have done as a Citizen of United State of America, I might
have been awarded one of the Top Award from that Country. But, my sincere steps in the larger Public and National Interests,
without any intention or motive for personal gain or benefit, I have annoyed a large Number of Powerful and influential people
since their interests have been made questionable by such steps. As a Result, instead of any award, injustice was ensured
to me from the Supreme Court, under infringement of my Constitutional Rights guarantee Under Article 32 of the Constitution.
Convenor : Movement for Accountability to Public (MAP)
Columnist : For Several DAILY Newspapers in India
Author: A MODEL OF NEW CONSTITUTION FOR INDIA
(Old Name: Milap Chand Choraria)
Address for Correspondence Only:-
B-5/52, Sector-7, Rohini,
New Delhi-110 085 MOBILE:01120036132 Dated
25th June 2004
His Excellency Shri A. P. J. Kalam,
Honble President of India,
Probity, not the Pseudo Probity
Youre Excellency Sir,
Youre Excellency Sir, What I have done with great pain for larger National Interests and Public importance,
if I could have done as a Citizen of United State of America, I might have been awarded one of the Top Award from that Country.
But, my sincere steps in the larger Public and National Interests, without any intention or motive for personal gain or benefit,
have annoyed a large Number of Powerful and influential people since their interests have been made questionable by such steps.
As a Result, instead of any award, injustice was awarded to me from the Supreme Court in serious violations of my Rights of
Constitutional Remedy Guaranteed under Article 32 of the Constitution of India as well in contravention from 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". If the issues
and matters raised by me have been considered for larger National and Public Interests, various important changes may have
been surfaced towards betterment for democracy as a whole.
Youre Excellency Sir, in last 20 years Probity from the Judiciary shifting towards pseudo probity. This fact
can be exemplified from my own stiff experiences. In November, 1983, on the basis of my Complaint just by Registered Post,
Honble Kolkata High Court constituted an enquiry and in September 1984 first time in Indian Judicial History a Munsif was
dismissed from the Judicial Service. Whereas under changed meaning of the probity Now, I am fighting for Justice from the
Supreme Court, as I have referred in my Letter dated 18th June 2004 to Honble Chief Justice of India Mr. R. C. Lahoti, copy
is enclosed and also posted in the Website: http//milapchoraria.tripod.com/scpetition. In fact under threat from the Mafia
I am always compelled to changing my addresses. Therefore, if I may be compelled to bow down before the Mafia, the injustice
from the Supreme Court will be responsible for the same.
Youre Excellency Sir, Since childhood I have committed and followed life style with High Moral Standard,
honesty, sincerity. I was inspired and influenced by the world famous great saint, my grand uncle and successor of Anuvarat
Movement launcher Acharya Tulsi: Acharya Mahapragnyaji (His Holinesss Residential name was Nath Mal Choraria). During this
years eve-independence address to the nation, Your Excellency Sir, referred His Holinesss name with special reference relates
to moral issues. Two of my own sisters are saints under Acharya Mahapragnyaji. Since childhood I have acted against the corruption,
and on the basis of my own experience I can submit that the Corruption or Probity both can sustain or moving from top, not
from lower level. I have also participated in various social activities based on strong principles, honesty, and sincerity
and completely dedicated to causes. Some of my works with great pain for Larger National interest having of Public importance
are referred under heading SOCIAL PROFILE OF MILAP CHORARIA, copy of which is enclosed and posted at http//milapchoraria.tripod.com/msp.
In fact steps taken by me, always invited sufferings for me, but I never bothered for such sufferings, till I find probity
in Judicial System.
Youre Excellency Sir, With reference to my aforesaid statement I must affirm that if any of my statement
proved as false or pleading as wrong, then I must be punished for misuse of the Good Office of Your Excellency Sir, as well
as for the Contempt of Honble Supreme court.
Under Article 32 of the Constitution Rights of Constitutional Remedy have been guaranteed as the basic structure
and soul of the Indian Democracy and also of the Constitution of India. Even Parliament of India cannot amend or dilute such
basic structure of the Constitution.
Youre Excellency Sir, Supreme Court is also not empowered to refuse to entertain applications seeking
protection against infringement of such rights as settled by six Judge Bench (AIR:1950, Sc: 124) as already referred above,
and as founding fathers of the Constitution expected as Shri M. Ananthasayanam Ayyangar: (subsequently who was elected
as the Speaker of the 1st Lok Sabha) expressed during the debate on Article 32 of the Constitution of India held in the Constituent
Assembly of India on 9th December 1946, that: "the Supreme Court according to me is the Supreme guardian of the citizens
rights in any democracy. I would even go further and say that it is the soul of democracy. The executive which comes into
being for the time being is apt to abuse its powers, and therefore the Supreme Court must be there, strong and un-trammeled
by the day to day passions which may bring a set of people into power and throw them out also in a very short time. In less
than three or four years during which a parliament is in being, many governments may come and go, and if the fundamental rights
of the individual are left to the tender mercies of the Government of the day, they cannot be called fundamental rights at
all." and further that: "These and other rights must be carefully watched and for this purpose the Supreme Court has
been vested with the supreme ultimate jurisdiction."
Youre Excellency Sir, Founding Fathers never thought that in future even Supreme Court may belie their expectations.
Under such faith they specifically not referred the words "Supreme Court" under Article 12 of the Constitution to define within
the meaning of the "State". This might also correct that due to misuse of the Powers and abuse of the Authority by the Executives,
Workload under this provision might have been increased, and Judicial Activism might have caused some embarrassments for the
"executive". In this respect I fully agree with Honble Chief Justice of India Mr. R.C. Lahoti that Judges are also from
the Society and its impact may surface amongst Judges too. Such observations shows that Honble Chief Justice of India Mr.
R.C. Lahoti also aware of the gravity of the problem. But, because of lack of the appropriate and transparent systems
corruption at the Supreme Court level can cause for various reasons, not necessarily for monetary gains: but under the impact
of egoism; or indirect rapport with political leadership for appointments after retirement; or under some kind of influence;
or Court may adopts whimsical attitude under some bias not to accept truth based pleadings, with references to some crucial
Youre Excellency Sir, But for any reason such guaranteed Rights being the Basis Structure of the Constitution,
cannot be diluted in any manner whatsoever. But, on the basis of my own experiences, I am understood that for the various
reasons, in the garb of the interpretation or otherwise, and in violation of the oath taken Under the Constitution for upholding
the Constitution, efficacy of such Rights have been diluted substantially. Now, Honble CJI Mr. R. C. Lahoti intended to establish
probity in the Judicial System, which can be possible, when following important issues of larger public importance are addressed
after hearing all concerned, otherwise probity may be proved mere pseudo probity. Such issues are very much relevant for the
efficacy, probity and accountability in the Judiciary at the highest level.
Youre Excellency Sir, Therefore, this is my humble submissions that experiences having been gained by me
from Supreme Court Registry through refusal to receive for Registration a Writ Petition, under influence or otherwise, dilution
of the Rights to Constitutional Remedy have been arises, relating to me and on equal basis for more than 1000 Million people.
Therefore, Your Excellency Sir, kindly refer to the Honble Supreme Court to form an Opinion under Article 143 of the Constitution
on important Issues relates to substantial question of Law relating to the Constitution:-
1) How Supreme Court can be out of the meaning of the "State" under the Article 12 of the Constitution, when
its each Judge are appointed by the Head of the "State" (the President of India) and can be removed by the "State" (Parliament
2) How Principle of the finality of the Final Order of the Supreme Court interpreted under Article 147 of
the Constitution can be applied in respect of the "Rights of the Constitutional Remedy" guaranteed under Article 32 of the
3) How Supreme Court can make Rules under Article 145(1)( C) of the Constitution some one (not a Court) authorising
to refuse to receive a Writ Petition seeking protection of Fundamental Rights, in contravention of Clause (1) of Article 32
of Constitution, guaranteeing the Right to move Supreme Court seeking protection of any of the Rights conferred under Part
III of the Constitution ?.
4) How Truth based expression can be constituted as Contempt of the Honble Court, in contravention of Fundamental
Right of the expression and Core Principles of the democracy that "TRUTH SHALL PREVAILS."?
I hope that for the larger Public interest and matter of public importance Your Excellency Sir, graciously
pleased to write a Letter to Honble Chief Justice of India Mr. R. C. Lahoti.
With Best Regards,
Your Excellencys law Abiding Citizen
Enclosed as above.
Copy to Honble Chief Justice of India Mr. R. C. Lahoti, for his Lordships kind information.