Make your own free website on

Home | Letter 2 Hon'ble CJI Mr. R. C. Lahoti | PHOTO / TYPED COPIES OF DOCUMENTS | Volume-I (INDEX) | List of Dates | SYNOPSIS | PETIOTIONER/RESPONDENTS | Main Petition Para 1-15 | Main Petition Para 16-40 | Main Petition Para 41-60 | Main Petition Para 61-80 | Main Petition Para 81-100 | Main Petition Para 101-120 | MainPetition Para 121-155 | QUESTIONS OF LAW | Grounds | Prayers | Volume-II (INDEX OF ANNEXURES) | Letter of 9th September 2003 to President of India and Chief Justice of India | Press Statement | ANNEXURE-28-A (Forged Order Sheet) | Application 4 Prosecution 2 Justice Ahamadi | Application 2 Prosecute Registrar SC
Letter of 9th September 2003 to President of India and Chief Justice of India
Also read Letter dated 30th March 2004 to Hon'ble Chief Justice of India


Columnist : For DAILY Newspapers in India


(Under a project for Nationwide Debate to formulate public opinion)

The then Member: Sub-Committees on Finance & Marketing Under Working Group on SSI Sector for Ninth Five Year

Plan Constituted by the Government of India

A-47, UGF, 11/56, D.B.Gupta Road,

New Delhi-110 005 Dated 9th September 2003


Honble President of India Dr. A. P. J. Kalam,

Rashtrapati Bhawan,

New Delhi-110004

Honble Chief Justice of India Mr. Visheshwar Nath Khare,


Registrar General,

Supreme Court of India,

New Delhi-110001

Honble Excellencies,

Sub: "I may be compelled to commit suicide to record

my stiff protest against denial of Justice."

This was my dream to prove that a person can run his bussiness with honesty, sincerity and through truth, but I was failed when I suffered atrocities caused under Politics-Crime-Nexus. Trust was reposed on me by a large number of people, because of my secrifices. Here I want to refer some exemples, from which I could have earned Crores of Rupees, if I could have joined todays demoralised politics:

  1. In one matter, one Monopoly House always preferred Kolkata High Court for the reasons best known to them, as such they filed Writ Petition C. R. No. 10856 (W) of 1979, with reference to one of their matter against Union of India, though not relates to Kolkata or West Bengal. In consideration of larger public interests I along with few others filed Petition for addition of Party. Possibly said Petition was first of its kind in nature of Public Interest Litigation, but till then PIL was not recognised. Honble Judge appreciated our argument, but rejected the petition on the grounds that we are not interested party in the matter. However, I used telegraphic message system and monopoly house lost its matter up to Supreme Court. In this matter under the Leadership of Shri Siddharth Shankar Ray, about 14 Advocates appeared against me. In this matter, some middlemen offered me a big amount, but could not able to purchase me. In the said matter, Mr. Milon K. Banerji, Bar-at-Law was appeared on behalf of Union of India and personally appreciated my steps, as such subsequently I requested him to apear in one of my matter against Union of India, but he replied: "I am afraid I am not permitted to any causes against the Union of Indai" by his letter dated 8th November 1981.
  2. Two Multi-national Companies under arrangements at their parent Companies at abroad decided for merger of two companies at the cost of public interests. In one of the Company Field Marshal Sam Manek Shaw was a Director and unsuccessfully tried to convince me. Proposal of merger was initially did under approval from Government of India, but finally rejected declaring it against public interests, in considerations of facts and datas placed in a Writ Petition filed by me before Supreme Court. In this matter one Senior Lawyer appeared against me. Subsequently in consideration of his clients failure in the merger, he always considered me as his personal enemy. I dont want to put his name here to avoid any controversy due to my own present situations. Photocopy of News published in this respect subsequent developments edited by me in 1984 are enclosed herewith.
  3. In 1994, "Pearless" Company obtained stay Order from Kolkata High Court, against some direction issued by Reserve Bank of India, certainly under connivance with some Officers of Reserve Bank of India, because the Stay Order was obtain by hiding the fact relates to one order of Supreme Court. Some one placed the matter in my notice. I wrote Letter dated 28th November 1994 to the Governor of Reserve Bank of India, and others interlia that "The Peerless complied with the directions given by the said Judgment (dated 30th January 1992) for just tow months and one day from 31st January 1992 as per Annual Report and accounts for 1991-92. Peerless reversed the effect of the said Judgment from 1st April 1992 by changing the nomenclature by treating the deposite as Income in the name of processing charges instead of subscriptions in the Profit and Loss Accounts". In my said Letter I warned that such change "This is to be tentamount as a Contempt of the Honble Court." After receipt of my said Letter Reserve Bank of India moved Supreme Court and Pearless suffered a liability of about Rs.700 Crores, compelling its longtime Chairman Mr. P. C. Sen to resign from the office of Director of Company, after the said Judgment. Copy of my said Letter dated 28th November 1994 and subsequent News relates to Judgment and resignation of Mr. P. C. Sen published in Bussiness Standard dated 5th January 1996 and Economic Times dated 18th January 1996 respectively are annexed herewith.
  4. Colgate Indias annual remitance to USA was Rs. 150 Lakhs, against its Share Capital of Rs. 1.5 (One and half lakh only). Late Jyotirmoy Basu, M. P. handed over the matter to me, and I published the matter under heading Multinational Loot, and distributed it to all Members of Parliament. During that period Moral Standard of the Politicians was much better than today, as a result, Colgate was directed for its indianisations.
  5. In 1994 one German Bank offered Loan of Rs.100 Crores, to National Small Industries Corporation (NSIC), against 1% p.a. interest. Matter came to my notice. I was then active as General Secretary of one Apex Organisation of Small Scale Industries. In that capacity when I ask the Chairman of NSIC, what wll be their interest rate for their borrowers, reply was 18% p.a. When I wanted to know the reason for the same, he refused to disclose it. But, he done one favour, when Chairman of that German bank came India, he infomrfd me about his Delhi program. I myself, and President of my organisation met with the Chairman of the German Bank. Initially after knew about our designations, Bank Chairman offered invitation for Germany to me, and my President for 15 days (7 days to attend one related Seminar and 7 days for sightseeing). But, my interest was to know the reason behind such high rate would be charged by NSIC from its borrowers. I started asking some related question in peace meal basis. Initially Bank Chairmanm not realised the real object of my questions, because of way of my placements of the questions, but however, he realised that he had disclosed something, which should not have been disclosed by him. Therefore, he become angry, and stopped the meeting in halfway and cancelled his offer of invitation to Germany. After coming back I wrote a Letter to the then Finance Secreatary Mr. Montek Singh Ahluwalia, that if said Loan is accepted, I will met him in Court, because indirect interest rate of the German Bank was 1% (plus 12% in the garb of Foreign Exchange Security Guarantee Charges, charged by Penal Members appointed by Bank itself from Germany).

But, for me situation is totally different, my each and every fundamental right have been infringed completely and subsequently suspended not in consistent with Clause (4) of Article 32 of the Constitution. Mafiadom is keenly interested to kill me, under its close connections with most corrupt but cunning politician Jyoti Basu. Since, I am a sufferer, otherwise others cannot imagine the real charater of Shri Jyoti Basu. I have tried up to my extreme levels, and approached each and every authority and upto Supreme Court, but misccariage of Justice was granted to me.

By Judgment (2002) 4 SCC 388) dated 10th April 2002, Honble Supreme Court admitted possibility of miscarriage of Justice by observing that "does it, however, mean and imply a closed door even if the order of this Court depicts that the same stands in violation of natural justice adversely and seriously affecting the rights of the parties or the same depicts manifest injustice rendering the order a mockery of justice" and under Para 42 observed its "concern of this Court for rendering justice in a cause is not less important than the Principle of finality of its judgment. We are faced with competing principles ---ensuring certainty and finality". But, under the impact of the said principle of finality, Court could not reached unto desire levels, thus fixed certain terms between the Justice and miscarriage of justice, not consistent with Clause (4) of Article 32 of the Constitution of India.

I am enclosing herewith a copy of List of Dates (in which all dates relates to my sufferings are included), from which it can be proved that my suffering of personal atrocity having intensity with severe magnitude, is not just rarest among rares and exclusive and unprecented matter of infringement of fundamental rights suffered by any individual under Politics-Crime-Nexus, which caused my all liberties miserable. From entire country in last 50 years of democracy a "single similar matter combines juristic concern with the intensity of one having suffered such personal atrocity" cannot be referred by any one, in which under Politics-Crime-Nexus large number of Judicial Officers and Court Officers (Advocates) were got embraced or corrupted or influenced this way or that way, to ensure injustice to me. Under such Nexus, Extra-Ordinary-Dangerous situation against me was created under which my rights to justice was completely Infringed. Since last about 20 year I am fighting against Political-Crime-Nexus, with stiff protest and tried my extreme levels to get Justice, but "miscarriage of Justice" was granted me. Resultantly criminal acts of the Mafiadom by criminal means were protected, proving that under political support Mafiadom is much much powerful than law of the Land. This situation was developed, because some important issues and grounds were not examined before application of the principle of finality of the final orders of Supreme Court, not in consistent with the provisions of Article 32 of Constitution. I am going to refere those important issues and grounds in my fresh Writ Petition to be filed to try once again as I will try as last chance to get Justice. This is my firm views that because of such principle of finality negationist attitude was developed in respect of fundamental rights of individuals guaranteed under Article 32 of the Constitution and Supreme Court tried to fill-up the vacuumed caused under impact of such principle through PILs.

In considerations of my past experience I am placing on records in advance that in respect of my last try to get justice if any kind of obstructions were caused at Registry level or justice is denied to me, in such circumstance, I may be compelled to commit suicide to record my stiff protest against denial of Justice. This is my undertaking that "Upon hearing on merit, if my Writ Petition proved as vicious or based on frivolous or contains scandalous matters, I must be punished for misuse of rights to remedy".

With Best Regards

A Law abiding citizen,



(Milap Choraria)


  • Photocopy of News published in Amrita Bazar Patrika on 15th November 1994;
  • Photocopy of Lead News published in Financial Times, and related some other News and subsequent relevant developments edited in 1984 by me;
  • Letter dated 28th November 1994, to the Governor, Reserve Bank of India, with Photocopies of Two related News; and
  • List of Dates.

Copies by Registered Post for informations to:

  1. Shri Solee Sorabjee, Attorney General of India,
  2. President, Supreme Court Bar Association,
  3. Chairman, Bar Council of India,
  4. Shri S. D. Sharma, Chairman Lok Sevak Sangh, Transparency International; India Chapter,
  5. Through E-Mail to Amnesty International and other International Human Right organisations.
  6. Few Senior Lawyers of Supreme Court,

Few important Journalists.

List of Dates enclosed with the Letter is not referred here as the most of dates were covered in Writ Petition

Letter Dated 30th January 2004 to Hon'ble Chief Justice of India

Honble Chief Justice of India Mr. Visheshwar Nath Khare,

Through Registrar General,

Supreme Court of India,

New Delhi-110001

Honble Lordship,

This has with reference to my Letter dated 9th September 2003 under the Subject caption: "I may be compelled to commit suicide to record my stiff protest against denial of Justice." by Registered Post to Honble President of India Dr. A. P. J. Kalam, and Your Lordship, with copies by Registered Post for informations to Attorney General of India Mr. Soli J. Sorabjee, President, Supreme Court Bar Association, Chairman, Bar Council of India, Shri S. D. Sharma, Chairman Lok Sevak Sangh, Transparency International; India Chapter, and through E-Mail to Amnesty International and other International Human Right organizations, Few Senior Lawyers of Supreme Court, and Few important Journalists. I was compelled to take such a decision to commit suicide if Justice is denied to me, because I am a man of principle and I never compromise for the principles.

From the leading News item dated 29th January 2004 "Sting shows justice on sale" published in the Times of India it appears that respective incident have opened the eyes of the Honble Supreme Court, particularly of Your Lordship. I am writing this letter, because I am a severe sufferer from the embracement of Judicial Officers/Advocates based on the justice-on-sale against me not in one single matter, but in several matters, caused under influence of Politics-Crime-Nexus, as referred in detail in Writ Petition (Civil) filed under Filling Diary No. 22474/2003 dated 29th October 2003. Three months have been elapsed, but matter is still not registered as a Writ Petition because Supreme Court Registry, particularly the Section 1-B, for the reasons best known to them, but ignoring the Rule 7 and 8 of the Part IV ORDER XXXV of the Supreme Court Rules, 1966 get caused to refuse to register my earlier Writ Petition filed in 2002, as a Writ Petition, and once again might be eager to cause such a situation to refuse to register my aforesaid Writ Petition. In my Writ Petition (Containing about 400 Pages) I have referred in detail that since 1983 how I am suffering because of the embracement of several Judicial Officers and renowned Advocates, miscarriage of Justice in the Supreme Court. I have learned values of the morals and principles from my childhood as I belongs to a great family in which world famous spiritual leader Acharya Mahapragnya ji was borne, to whom present President of India Dr. A. P. J. Abdul Kalam meets thrice, in last one year, to discuss the moral related issues, and His Excellency specifically referred His Holinesss name in his Eve-Republican day address of 25th January 2004 to the Nation. My two of own sisters are saints. My Lords, I written more than 250 articles, based on my own severe but grave experiences and sufferings from the system, which now completely polluted by the mafia-politics-nexus. My Articles were published in most of Hindi Newspapers covering entire country and few English Newspapers which correctly corroborating by the recent views of the Retiring Chief Election Commissioner J.M. Lyngdoh that Indian Politics and Politicians are turned as a cancer. Some time in or about 1997, I under the leadership of respected Shri S. D Sharma and along with two others sat on Fast unto death on demand of enactment of Lokpal Law, out side Lajpat Bhawan, New Delhi. However, after two days of our fasting Learned Mr. Soli Sorabjee, Justice (Retd.) Mr. Rajinder Sacher, Mr. Raj Mohan Gandhi and Shri Kuldeep Nayyar, persuaded to withdraw the fast. When we were not ready to withdraw, Learned Mr. Soli J. Sorabjee, committed that if necessary, in future he will sit along with us, then only we broken our Fast.

Honble Lordships, first time in Judicial History of India the Constitutional Bench headed by Mr. Justice S. P. Bharucha (CJI) shown courage to admit that miscarriage of justice is going on in the Supreme Court. In this respect I must submit before Your Lordship that till the principle of "Be you ever so high, the law is above you" is not made applicable in strict terms, in respect of all the matters, irrespective of whoever involved in the respective matter, till then situation cannot be changed.

In this context, I must refer the Writ Petition (Civil) No. 559 of 1995 and Writ Petition (Civil) No. 151 of 1996 both filed by me and if miscarriage of justice would not have been happened, then the situation must have been different, then issuance of false and unwarranted warrants issued by the Judicial Magistrate. We must keep in mind that majority of the crimes are based on Civil disputes. Therefore, until and unless Civil Dispute Justice system is not corrected the rate of crimes would be in high side. Secondly, principle that "Be you ever so high, the law is above you" should be made applicable for each and every person on strict terms to make accountable to the system itself.

After Vohra Committee Report published on 1st August 1995 on 9th August 1995 I filed a PIL as Writ Petition (Civil) No. 559 of 1995 with prayers:

i) ISSUE direction to respondent No. 1 (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;

  1. ISSUE direction to respondent No. 2 (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 Honble Court, impose the same for future elections till the respondent No. 1 makes Law; as prayed for under prayer No. i ) hereinabove.
  2. under paragraph 14 of the Writ Petition interalia I suggested as under:-

    1. 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;
    2. 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;
    3. The Members of Parliament and / or State Legislative Assemblies should be defined as Public Servants under all criminal laws.

My said Writ Petition was dismissed. Thereafter, on 20th March 1996, I filed a Petition before Election Commission of India that in the consideration of Article 324 (1) read with Article 326 of the Constitution Commission should invite following information on oath or affirmation from the intending candidates for such elections to furnish along with nomination papers: -

    1. Whether any Criminal Proceeding in any Court of law is pending? if yes ; please state:
    2. (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 ?

    3. Whether, Charge Sheet is filed by the investigating authority in the above referred Crime Number? If, yes, please state: -
      1. Name of the Court, in which charge sheet is filed?
      2. Number of the Crime Registered in the Court?
      3. Date of Charge Sheet?
      4. Reference of Law under which Charge Sheet is filed?

    4. The present status of the proceedings?
    5. If the Criminal Proceedings are pending more than one, similar informations should be provided in respect of each such proceeding."

Three Copies of the said Petition were deposited in the Office of the Election Commission of India, against Acknowledgement. After receipt of my said Petition Commission issued a Notification asking the intending candidates to give certain details with reference to criminal cases, if pending or disposed off against them, but, in a surprising manner one amongst the then Election Commissioners Mr. G.V.G. Krishnamurthy, falsely claimed that Notification issued by the Commission in that respect was based on ideas developed by him.

That on 7th February 1996 I filed another Public Interest Litigation being Writ Petition (Civil) No. 151/96 with the prayers interalia as follows: -

  • 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
  • ISSUE, directions to the STATE to make appropriate change and/or amendment in law within one year as suggested under Schedule "A" therein, the drafts of the amendments or change, or replacements of the following Laws (as) were referred under Schedule of the (said) Writ Petition: -
  1. Representatives of People Act;
  2. Section 197 of Criminal Procedure Code;
  3. Official Secrets Act;
  4. A New Model of Civil Procedure Code
  5. Rules under Sub-Clause (C ) Clause (1) of Article 145 of the Constitution of India to define "appropriate proceedings for Civil Reliefs"

That on 29th March 1996 upon hearing of the Petition Honble Chief Justices Court presided by A. M. Ahmadi C.J. as then he was, observed that I have done a very good work and advised me to forward model of new Civil Procedure Code innovated by me to the Chairman of the Law Commission of India accordingly by Letter dated 6th June 1996 I did it by Registered Post to the Honble Chairman of the Law Commission of India.

In fact in the year of 1983 on the basis of my sufferings from justice-on-sale I developed a new Model of Civil Procedure Code and forwarded it by Regd. post to the then Law Minister of India Shri Asok Sen. I also forwarded it to A. M. Ahmadi, CJ, as then he was, by letter dated 3rd March 1995, by Registered Post. This a matter of the fact that recent amendments in Civil Procedure Code were adopted from the said Model Draft but without recognising my work against universal principle of the Intellectual Property Rights. After disposed off my said Writ Petition it came to my notice from Newspapers that Justice A. M. Ahmadi (Retd. CJI), appointed one committee on the subject, headed by Dr. Abhishek Singhvi, but without referring my said Writ Petition. Here, I must refer that first time in the Judicial History of Indian Judiciary, in my matter, in 1984 after enquiry Honble Calcutta High Court dismissed one Munsif from the judicial services, but justice is still far from me, due to involvement of the influential Mafia having close connection with powerful politicians of India, proving that "Be you ever so high, the law is above you" is not applicable against all persons. In fact Your Lordships remarks that "If this is the state of affairs, only God knows what will happen to the country", is very important, and disgusted state of affairs, would be exposed, when my Writ Petition would be heard.

I am sure that suggestion made by me in my aforesaid Writ Petitions and important question of law raised by me in my Writ Petition (Civil) filed under Filling Diary No. 22474/2003 dated 29th October 2003, by me are examined, considered and adjudicated and hold as prayed for, then the large portion of the corruption can be restricted not only within the Judiciary but also at the political level, because till corruption at the political levels are not checked, corruption can not be removed from the Judiciary too. I want to make two new suggestions for insertion in the respective Laws:-

Complaints under the Advocates Act should be filed under Section 340 of Criminal Procedure Code, before the respective Court, and such Court should forward its findings before the respective State Bar Council, which should take appropriate action in the matter under the time bound limitations. Otherwise, complaint should be automatically transferred to Bar Council of India. And Bar Council of India would not take appropriate actions within Six months the complainant should be entitled to move before the Supreme Court. Whenever conduct of any Advocate proved as criminal misconduct of professional duties, he should be debarred from Advocacy in future.

Hearing of the applications Under Section 340 of Criminal Procedure Code should be made mandatory with the compliance as too mandatory.

With Best Regards

A Law abiding citizen,


(Milap Choraria)

Copy to Ld. Mr. Soli J. Sorabjee, Attorney General of India, 134, Sunder Nagar, IInd floor, New Delhi.

Extra Copy to Honble Chief Justice of India Mr. Visheshwar Nath Khare,

Krishna Menon Marg,

New Delhi-110011


Followings was not the Part of the Letter

That if the said Public Interest Litigation being Writ Petition (Civil) No. 151/96 my suggestion to amend Section 197 of Criminal Procedure Code, could have been heeded, then possibly Ahmedabad matter would have been occurred. This is matter of fact that Supreme Court cannot hear each and every such matter, but can compel for appropriate amendment in the respective Laws to prevent miscarriage of Justice or embracement of Judicial Officers by Mafia elements or wrong doers. My suggestions were just not to make accountable to the Judicial Officers, but to all people. Amendment in Section 197 were suggested as under:-

Suggestion made under Chapter-II of the Writ Petition (PIL) (Civil) No. 151 of 1996 to amend Section 197 of Criminal Procedure Code:-

( Existing Clause 4 should be replaced by the following new clause)

(4) The Central Government or State Government as the case may be, shall grant or refuse the previous / according sanction within six months from the date of original application for sanction, otherwise the same shall be deemed to be granted / accorded.

(5) The Prosecution proceedings against the Prime Minister of India, any Union Minister, Chief Minister of a State, Public Servants holding post of Secretary rank in Central or State Government service, any Judge or Magistrate posted at any District within territory of India shall befiled before Supreme Court.

(6) Prosecution proceedings against any Minister of a State and / or Public Servant of All India services (IAS, IPS, and allied Services) except those referred under Clause (5) shall be filed before a High Court having local Jurisdiction in the matter.

(7) Prosecution proceedings against any Public Servants, except those referred under Clause (5) and (6) shall be filed before a Court of District Session Judge, having local Jurisdiction in the matter.

        1. Filling Court, after ex-parte prima-facie satisfaction of complaint, shall transfer the prosecution
        2. proceedings for trial and adjudication to any of its sub-ordinate Court(s)

        3. Filling Court, for its ex-parte prima-facie satisfaction can call any Record from any authority.

The provision of Section 19 of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 should be amended accordingly.