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

Complaint against criminal conspiracy going on in Supreme Court under influence to abet me to commit suicide, to protect interests of Mafiadom and its supporting Powerful Advocates, in serious violation of the Fundamental Rights to Remedy.


Columnist : For Several 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

Convenor : Movement for Accountability to Public (MAP)


President : Federation of Aluminium Users Association of India

Secretary : Tamkor Vikas Samity (Rajsthan)

Member : Transparency International (India), H.O.Berlin (Germany)

Member : ICANN

Worker (Member) : Servants of the People Society ( DB), Lajpat Bhawan,New Delhi

Worker (Member) : Workers Committee of Lok Sevak Sangh, Lajpat Bhawan,ND.

POST BOX NO. 2690 

New Delhi-110 005                                  Dated 26th April 2004


  1. Honble Shri V. N. Khare, Chief Justice of India,
  2. Honble Mr. Justice S. Rajendra Babu, Designated Chief Justice of India,
  3. Honble Mr. Justice R. C. Lahoti, in near future to be appointed as Chief Justice of India,
  4. Honble Mr. Justice N. Santosh Hegre,
  5. Honble Mr. Justice Doraiswamy Raju,
  6. Honble Mr. Justice Y. K. Sabarwal, possibly in future may be Chief Justice of India,
  7. Honble Mr. Justice Ruma Pal,
  8. Honble Mr. Justice S. N. Variava,
  9. Honble Mr. Justice Shivaraj V. Patil,
  10. Honble Mr. Justice K. G. Balakrishnan, possibly in future may be Chief Justice of India,
  11. Honble Mr. Justice Brijesh Kumar,
  12. Honble Mr. Justice B. N. Agarwal,
  13. Honble Mr. Justice P. Venkatarama Reddi,
  14. Honble Mr. Justice Ashok Bhan,
  15. Honble Mr. Justice Arijit Pasayat,
  16. Honble Mr. Justice B. P. Singh,
  17. Honble Mr. Justice D. M. Dhamadhikari,
  18. Honble Mr. Justice H. K. Sema,
  19. Honble Mr. Justice S. B. Sinha,
  20. Honble Mr. Justice Arun Kumar,
  21. Honble Mr. Justice B. N. Srikrishna,
  22. Honble Mr. Justice A. R. Lakshamanna,
  23. Honble Mr. Justice G. P. Mathur, and
  24. Honble Mr. Justice S.H. Kapadia, possibly in future may be Chief Justice of India,

All Honble Judges of Supreme Court of India.

All through Registrar General of Supreme Court of India, with one copy each directly by Post.

Complaint against criminal conspiracy going on in Supreme Court under influence to abet me to commit suicide, to protect interests of Mafiadom and its supporting Powerful Advocates, in serious violation of the Fundamental Rights to Remedy.

Honble Lordships,

I am severe victim of the powerful mafiadom, having nexus with the several Powerful Politician in India including Shri Jyoti Basu, who with the help of such politicians, using muscle and money powers, and through embracement of Judicial Officer and some Powerful Advocates caused such a situation under which my all fundamental rights including Rights to Remedy become infractuous, which I have referred in detail in Writ Petition filed on 29th October 2003 under filing Diary No. 22474 of 2003. Matters relates to my suffering were examined by Vohra Committee, headed by the then Union Home Secretary Mr. N. N. Vohra for its Report, in respect of Criminalisation of the Politics. Said Mafiadom is so powerful, influential, and competent to effect Administration of Justice even some extent up to the level of the Supreme Court.

The Constitutional Bench headed by as he then was Honble Chief Justice of India Mr. S. P. Bharucha by Judgment Dated 20th April 2002 shown courage to admit that mockery of justice under miscarriage of justice, and / or abuse of judicial proceedings, and / or orders without jurisdictions or under bias, in to some extent is going on in the Supreme Court. To remove such situation new platform of curative Writ Petitions were created. However, conditions laid down by the said Judgment, for filing of Curative Writ Petitions by the Petitioner-in-person like me (having suffered from the embracement of Judicial Officers and Powerful Advocates, committed criminal misconduct violating their respective duties for the monetary gains and benefits of the said Mafiadom), inconsistent with the provisions of Part III of the Constitution, due to impact of the principle of finality of the Supreme Court Orders. In fact the principle of finality of the Supreme Court Orders in respect of the orders passed under the provisions of Part III of the Constitution was held and made applicable, without considerations, as the same were never placed before Honble Supreme Court, of the important substantial question of law relating to clear concept of Virtual Two Supreme Courts, as defined in a separate sheet.

From the entire Constitution mockery of justice under miscarriage of justice cannot be justified. Rather Supreme Court has been assigned very important independent, separate and untrammeled responsibility of the guardian, guarantor and watchdog armed with unchallenged, untrammeled, with unrestricted Supreme Powers over all other authorities (including Parliament) to protect Indian democracy by protecting the Fundamental Rights of the Individuals, contrary to which reversed impacts from such responsibility, in any manner whatsoever, cannot be justified, while in my matters it appears. In fact mockery of justice under miscarriage of justice could be possible in violation of the oath taken under Constitution for its upholding.

After the said Judgment, on 4th September 2002 I filed Writ Petition under filing Diary No. 17454 of 2002. When I presented my said Writ Petition before the then Assistant Registrar, of Section 1-B, of the Supreme Court, who after going through the entire Petition, appeared to be intended to get refused the said Writ Petition from its Registration, to pleased some one named in the said Writ Petition. As such by Letter dated 22nd October 2002, Supreme Court Registry informed me that my said Writ Petition is refused to register as a Writ Petition. Such conduct of the respective Officer of the Supreme Court Registry was in serious violation of Rule 7 and 8 of the Part IV Order XXXV of the Supreme Court Rules, 1966, which specifically meant for the Application for the Enforcement of Fundamental Rights. Thereafter, I lodged formal complaint before the Registrar-General of Supreme Court. In the Complaint I referred wrong name of the said Assistant Registrar, under wrong report about his name.

However, after, a long correspondence, on 29th October 2003 I filed fresh Writ Petition. Between 4th September 2002 and 29th October 2003 situation in Section 1-B was changed. Under new situation, Writ Petition by the Petitioners-in-person should have been presented before Joint Registrar as against Assistant Registrar. But within the same period said Assistant Registrar of Section 1-B, was also promoted as Joint Registrar. When I presented my said Writ Petition before Joint Registrar, Section 1-B, he just seen my name from the Writ Petition and apparently not objected about anything from the Writ Petition. But, possibly back of me he instructed to scrutiny officers to cause harassments by withholding my Writ Petition by any means from listing for hearing or registration as Writ Petition. As such on 10th October 2003 when I met with the concerned Scrutiny Officer of section 1-B, to know about the status of my Writ petition, I was asked to submit a letter whether my Writ Petition is Civil or Criminal in nature, which I submitted by, letter dated 10th October 2003.

Thereafter, matter was sent, by Section 1-B to Section X, where it was came to my notice that a long list of alleged errors of total item Nos. 22 were referred in my matter. In which one issue was referred that V.I. P.s were made Party Respondents. I was asked for each such Respondent to deposit Court Fee of Rs.10/-. When I asked to Assistant Registrar of Section X to name the V. I. P., Party Respondents? Then Assistant Registrar of Section-X, returned the file to Section 1-B, where the said alleged error was corrected by directing me just to deposit deficit stamp of Rs.10/- as shortage of Process fee.

However, most of the alleged errors were not possible to be corrected by the Petitioners in person. However, I corrected them using scanning machine, paying heavy cost for the same. However, one such alleged error already replied by me by Letter dated 10th October 2003. Out of 22 errors I corrected mostly as far as possible for me, and referred the reasons for not correction for the rest by Letter dated 15th December 2003. For instance under Item No. 22, I was directed to Change the Writ Petition as PIL, which I replied that "Since the Writ Petition is with regards to infringement of my personal fundamental rights as such I cannot add the word PIL".

After 15th December 2003, I was expecting that matter, may come up for preliminary hearing at any time thereafter. When I enquired from Section X, I was informed that file was sent back to Section 1-B for the final examinations of the correction made by me. As per my knowledge, thereafter file never come back to Section-X where it was withhold for the reasons best known to said Joint Registrar of Section 1-B. However, on 23rd February 2004 I sent a Press Statement to about 500 Newspapers, TVChannels, Media person from India and abroad, posted the same at the various Boards of discussions E-groups. Possibly under the impact of the same and after withholding the matter for more than four months in the garb of "Under Scrutiny" letter No. D. No. 5610/2003/X dated 19th April 2004 was sent by Section-X which was delivered me on 24th April 2004, directing me thereby "that the prayers, which have already disposed of / decided by this Honble Court are required to be deleted" and "You are therefore, requested to amend the Writ Petition accordingly within a week from receipt of this letter failing which action contemplated under the rule will be initiated", from which criminal conspiracy to get refused or rejected my said Writ Petition, is appearing.

Since, I have raised very important substantial question of Law related to concept of Virtual two Supreme Courts, which earlier never been placed before Supreme Court, and as such any prayer with reference to that context cannot be considered as already disposed of / decided by this Honble Court, till such important substantial question of Law related to concept of Virtual two Supreme Court is not examined and decided by the Larger Constitutional Bench of Honble Supreme Court. However, to remove confusion from the language of the prayers I have amended the Prayer portion of the Writ Petition.

Therefore, this is my humble prayer that enquiry should be ordered in the matter for the sanctity and efficacy of the Supreme Court, as its not the Court of the Money Powers, rather of the Common man, to uphold the Constitutional values and Core Principles of the Jurisprudence, which at present are at a serious threats, for various reasons.

Your Lordships duty bound Law abiding Citizen



(Milap Choraria)


(2) Copy of related Press Statement

Enter supporting content here