THIS POST IS A CONTINUATION OF PART 6 , BELOW-
If the court cases due to FIRs in Police stations are computerized , you can see a SUDDEN SPURT OF WORK LOAD FOR THE JUDGES from a particular week onwards..
It is because a CRYING BOLLYWOOD SUPERSTAR said on his Axis Bank sponsored show that POLICE CANNOT REFUSE FIR – it is mandatory .
No judge will agree to this sort of thing . .
AND PRETTY SOON WE HAD THE PUBLIC RUNNING TO THE POLICE STATIONS FOR MINOR EGO PROBLEMS .
EVERY FIR, HAS ITS SHARE OF PAPERWORK , INVOLVEMENT OF LAWYERS AND JUDGES.
Lawyers have become millionaires just be getting his client “exempted from personal appearance” .
Every 4 months the lawyer will collect 5000, 20000, 40000 or more depending on how well to do his client is.
The case will drag on for years –may be 20 or 30. The lawyer milks the man on whom a frivolous FIR is slapped—by doing nothing.
The lawyer will get the next court appearance date by using a mobile phone and convey it by phone or letter to his client who lives far away..
Below: Obviously all the advise of the CRYING BOLLYWOOD SUPERSTAR was only for others--
Check out 1.10 --where "police force must not be used by HIGH AND MIGHTY for own selfish ends " .-
I was slapped with a defamation case by this CRYING SUPERSTAR by using his PET top cop.
THE COMMIE PROFESSORS OF JNU WANT TO GIVE KASHMIR AWAY TO PAKISTAN -
WE THE PEOPLE OFTEN WONDER WHAT OUR "COLLEGIUM JUDGES" WANT..
BECAUSE THEY SEEM TO BE MORTALLY AFRAID OF JEW NOAM CHOMSKY.
We want the elected legislature to amend the constitution , find an easy way to punish 100% sure TRAITOR TO WATAN JUDGES in this electronic age of video and hidden cams.
Our Constitution or any other law have proved to be insufficient in punishing higher judiciary. It happened in the case of K. Veeraswami, a former judge of the Madras High Court who was prosecuted under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1946 for financial gains.
He fought his case 134 in 1991 in the Supreme Court which held that a sanction from the Chief Justice was needed before a criminal case could be registered against a judge.
A charge framed under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1946 without the prior approval of the Chief Justice of India lacked the force to prosecute a judge charged with corruption.
The Constitution of India provides for removal of a judge by way of impeachment on the grounds of proved misbehavior or incapacity.
The instance of Justice V. Ramaswamy shows that the constitutional mechanism of impeaching a corrupt judge may fail in the absence of the support of a two-third majority in the Parliament.
V. Ramaswamy, the son-inlaw of V. Veeraswami was the first judge to face impeachment for financial irregularities committed during his term as a Punjab and Haryana High Court judge.
But he got away with impeachment as the Congress MPs sitting in opposition completely abstained from voting in the Tenth Lok Sabha.
The constitutional provisions of impeaching an errant judge can thus fail by BILDERBERG CLUB controlled political manipulations.
The faith of WE THE PEOPLE in the judiciary has been eroded because MeLord judges are NOT afraid of stigma or punishment.
During the recent times, corruption in the judiciary is at an all time high as stories of judicial misconduct continue to tumble out of judicial cupboards.
In 2002, at least thirty-four sitting judges from all the three tiers of the Uttar Pradesh judiciary came under scanner for their alleged involvement in the Ghaziabad Court employees provident fund scam. The investigation against the erring judges is on.
Of late, the two developments that have embarrassed the country’s higher judiciary are the cash-for-judge scam and the misappropriation of money by a High Court judge.
In the cash-at-judge door scam, Justice Nirmal Yadav, a sitting judge of Punjab and Haryana High Court was relieved from judicial work after her name was involved for a receiving a bag of Rs. 15 lakhs.
The bag containing Rs. 15 lakhs was mistakenly delivered at the residence of Justice Nirmaljit Kaur, another sitting judge of the Punjab and Haryana High Court. Now, Justice Nirmal Yadav had asked the Chief Justice of India to take her back to work “as nothing has been proved”.
The second incident involves Justice Soumitra Sen of the Calcutta High Court who was held guilty of criminal misappropriation when he was an advocate and appointed receiver in a lawsuit. hereafter he became a judge of the Calcutta High Court.
On receipt of a report from the Chief Justice of the Calcutta High Court, the Chief Justice of India had recommended the Prime Minister for removing Justice Sen from office. The proposal to impeach Justice Sen is yet to materialize. The errant judge had rejected the advice to resign or seek voluntary retirement after he was found guilty of misconduct. Recently Justice Sen resigned before he faced the Lok Sabha proceedings for impeachment.
Corruption, land-grabbing charges and abuse of judicial office are among the sixteen charges framed against Justice P.D. Dinakaran currently facing removal proceedings in the Parliament. Justice Dinakaran as Chief Justice of the Karnataka High Court was recommended for being appointed a Supreme Court judge in August. 2009.
But after the land grabbing allegations were levelled, he went on leave and his elevation was stopped. Thereafter he was shifted to the Sikkim High Court as Chief Justice.
Read about Tamil dalit Christian convert Paul Daniel Dinakaran Premkumar below-
Read about V Ramaswami below-
Read about Saumitra Sen below-
Read about KG Balakrishnan below-
Read about the PF scam below-
A former Chief Justice of India was accused of getting special treatment for his daughter, a practicing lawyer in the Supreme Court during his tenure as the Chief Justice of India.
Another Chief Justice of India was accused of using his position as the CJI to get the subordinate judiciary to rule in favour of his mother-in-law in a suit that had been barred by limitation for decades.
Similarly another Chief justice of India faced allegations of delivering orders against the principles of natural justice and also for furthering business interests of his family.
No charges were, however, proved in any of the above instances.
“When the robed brethren break the code of correct conduct or rob the rule of law of its efficacy, sanctity and majesty, they too must be subject to severe discipline and punitive action in case of delinquency and aberration”.
BELOW ASSET DECLARATION ON VOLUNTARY BASIS -
When an attempt was made to bring the judiciary within the purview of the Right to Information Act, 2002, the judiciary voiced strong oppositions against it.
Former Chief Justice of India, K. G. Balakrishnan went to the extent of saying that since the CJI is not a constitutional authority it does not come within the purview of the RTI
The contentions of the CJI was, however, rejected by a parliamentary committee headed by E. M. Sudarsana Natchiappanan on 29 April, 2008. The Committee held that the judiciary comes under the purview of the Right to Information law with regard to all activities of administration except “judicial decision making”.
Interpreting section 2(h) of the RTI Act, the Committee said that from the definition of ‘public authority’, it is clear that all the constitutional authorities come under the definition of ‘public authority’.
That all the wings of the State – executive, legislature and judiciary are fully covered under this Act since all organs of the State are accountable to the citizens of India in a democratic state. The judiciary cannot immunize itself from judicial accountability under the RTI Act.
Judicial Standards and Accountability Bill was brought by UPA govt but had lapsed following dissolution of the 15th Lok Sabha in 2014.
If India has to be tis planet’s superpower in 17 years, we must bring as fresh a bill that seeks to change the present system of probing complaints of “misbehavior, incapacity and DISLOYALTY TO WATAN ” against Supreme Court and high court judges.
The flawed procedure for removal of higher court judges has been exposed by the antics of Justice CS Karnan of the Madras high court. Transferred to the Calcutta high court as a disciplinary measure, Karnan stayed the transfer order of the Chief Justice of India TS Thakur.
In his five-year-long tenure as permanent judge, Karnan has acted in gross disregard of judicial impropriety several times. He has threatened to invoke the SC/ST Prevention of Atrocities Act against his colleagues on the Madras Bench and even shot off letters alleging discrimination to the National Commission for SC/ST.
He had also accused the chief justice of the Madras HC SK Kaul of caste discrimination in apportioning judicial work. Though impeachment is the only provision available for removing high court and supreme court judges, the difficulty of garnering two-thirds majority of those present and voting, has led to the provision being sparingly used.
This is despite many judges in high courts facing allegations of corruption, sexual harassment, and misbehaviour. It is high time we enact the Judicial Standards and Accountability Bill which proposes alternate and easier processes for removal of judges.
The judiciary must not depend upon any legislation to enforce discipline among its robed brethren.
An independent judiciary is an indispensable requisite of a free society under the rule of law. Such independence implies freedom from interference by the executive or the legislature in the exercise of the judicial function but it does not mean that the judge is entitled to act in an arbitrary manner.
We must NEVER forget that the COLLGIUM Supreme Court of India has grabbed power by JUDICIAL ADVENTURISM.
And to remove a COLLEGIUM judge they have made it almost impossible, because our UNELECTED Rajya Sabha is still controlled by BIG BROTHER whom we kicked out in 1947.
Today by methods chosen by BILDERBERG CLUB, the Indian judiciary with the Supreme Court at its head and eighteen high courts in the State is THE most powerful judiciary in the world.
THE INDIAN JUDICIARY IS GUILTY OF PUSHING FOR TOTAL INDEPENDENCE , TO BE A DICTATOR, WHILE AT THE SAME TIME THEY PUSHED FOR NIL ACCOUNTABILITY.
THIS IS NONSENSE –
I SAY THIS AS A LEADER OF MEN , A COMMANDER OF SHIPS FOR 3 DECADES.
The Melords pushed their Melordship through its decisions in three main cases popularly known as the First, Second and Third Judges cases. ( THREE JUDGES CASE )
The Collegium system is one where the Chief Justice of India and a forum of four senior-most judges of the Supreme Court recommend appointments and transfers of judges. However, it has no place in the Indian Constitution. The CJI / President / ELECTED PM must follow the constitution.
The system was evolved through Supreme Court judgments in the Three Judges Cases: S.P. Gupta case (December 30, 1981) or the First Judges Case: It declared that the “primacy” of the CJI’s recommendation on judicial appointments and transfers can be refused for “cogent reasons.” The ruling gave the Executive primacy over the Judiciary in judicial appointments for the next 12 years.
Supreme Court Advocates on Record Association versus Union of India or the Second Judges Case(October 6, 1993): The majority verdict gave back CJI’s power over judicial appointments and transfers.
It says the CJI only need to consult two senior-most judges. “The role of the CJI is primal in nature because this being a topic within the judicial family, the Executive cannot have an equal say in the matter,” the verdict reasoned. However, confusion prevails as the CJIs start taking unilateral decisions without consulting two colleagues. The President is reduced to only an approver.
In Special Reference case of 1998 or the Three Judges Case (October 28, 1998): On a reference from former President K.R. Narayanan, the Supreme Court lays down that the CJIs should consult with a plurality of four senior-most Supreme Court judges to form his opinion on judicial appointments and transfers.
WHEN A PEDOPHILE MOLESTS A SMALL CHILD, HE / SHE WORKS THIS WAY—
SLOW AND STEADY !
PEHLA LOLLIPOP .
FINALLY SOMETHING ELSE TO SUCK ON .
MAJAA HAI !
BILDERBERG CLUB KI JAI !
I ASK MY READERS TO PUT ABOVE COMMENT IN PMO, MODIs, RAJNATH SINGHs, PARRIKKARs, JAVEDEKARs, NIRMALA SITARAMANs AND PRASADs WEBSITES .
TRIPLE SRIs spends his whole time camouflauging his gargantuan paunch.
Real yoga gurus do NOT have such a ridiculous TONDH nor do their dye their hair and beards.
WE WANT NGT TO COLLECT THE 5 CRORE "FINE" !
In the name of securing independence, the judiciary, however, lacked accountability either for the charges of corruption or for the disposal of cases or even in the matter of appointment of judges of the higher judiciary Principles of judicial independence have to be developed in consistent with the principles of judicial accountability.
In the past, the Supreme Court has clarified that policy decisions are the prerogative of the executive. Yet courts routinely pronounce verdicts on policy matters that require no legal or constitutional interpretation.
Recently, the Delhi High Court issued a notice on a self-serving petition filed by some South Delhi Residents Associations, wanting the Delhi Metro to go underground, notwithstanding the heavy cost involved. We all know these judges were the bottom dregs of the school cerebral barrel, who became lawyers.
Often judicial intervention causes more havoc than the policy it seeks to correct. Take the example of the Monitoring Committee set up by the Supreme Court in the drive to seal unauthorized commercial establishments in the national capital
The judiciary is not an elected or representative body, in touch with the people, and judges have hardly any experience in matters relating to public health, education and poverty alleviation programmes. Policymaking is best left to the executive.
That is why the judiciary must know its limits and must not try to run the government. .
A contempt notice was issued against Narendra Modi for his in an election rally in Gujarat justifying the Sohrabuddin encounter death.
We all know how the Melord’s tried to convert Ishrat Jehan into an innocent Barbie doll.
Who the hell is this man Sohrabuddin for whom the Melords’ collective hearts bleed ?
Let me quote Wikipedia:--
QUOTE: Apart from being involved in the criminal extortion racket in Gujarat, Sheikh was also involved in arms smuggling in Madhya Pradesh, and also had murder cases registered against him in Gujarat and Rajasthan.
Sheikh was also claimed by the police to be associated with the banned global terrorist organization Lashkar-e-Taiba and the Pakistani intelligence agency Inter-Services Intelligence, and was alleged to have planned to create communal chaos in the state by assassinating "an important political leader".
Sheikh was alleged by the police to be extorting protection money from local marble factories in Gujarat and Rajasthan. He was also claimed to have links to fellow underworld criminals Sharifkhan Pathan, Abdul Latif, Rasool Parti and Brajesh Singh, who were all members and associates of India's largest organized crime network and underworld mafia operated by Dawood Ibrahim.
During investigations before he was arrested, the Anti-Terror Squad (ATS) of the Gujarat police claimed to have found 40 AK-47 assault rifles from his village residence in Madhya Pradesh. Sohrabuddin Sheikh was accused of possessing 40 AK-47 assault rifles that were recovered from his house in Jharania village of Ujjain district in 1995.
At the time of his killing, he also had more than 60 pending cases against him, ranging from extorting protection money from marble factories in Gujarat and Rajasthan, to arms smuggling in Madhya Pradesh, to murder cases both in Gujarat and Rajasthan.
Sheikh was a notorious underworld criminal with links to the Sharifkhan Pathan alias Chhota Dawood and Abdul Latif gangs, and with Rasool Parti and Brajesh Singh, both known to be close to India's underworld kingpin Dawood Ibrahim. To escape the police, Sheikh fled with his family from Gujarat to the city of Hyderabad in the state of Telangana.UNQUOTE
Below: NARCO TEST -- KARIM TELGI NAMED NCP LEADERS , SHARAD PAWAR AND CHAGAN BHUJBAL.
Before entering politics Chagan Bhujbal was a impoverished vegetable vendor in Byculla Market where his mother was selling fruits in a tiny hovel stall..
WE THE PEOPLE WANT ALL MELORD JUDGES TO UNDERGO REFRESHER TRAINING COURSES TO REVALIDATE THEIR JUDICIAL LICENSE - SAY EVERY 3 YEARS .
MOST JUDGES LIVE IN SOME OTHER ANTIQUE ERA.
THEY NEED TO MOVE WITH THE TIMES.
WE THE PEOPLE OF INDIA WILL NOT TOLERATE COLLEGIUM JUDGES ENCOURAGING TREASON/ SEDITION IN OUR COLLEGES, UNDER PRESSURE FROM DESH DROHIS LIKE JEW NOAM CHOMSKY.
STUDENTS MUST STUDY.
FEW BAD FISH ARE POLLUTING THE FULL POND.
WE KNOW THE NAMES OF ULTRA RICH SUPREME COURT LAWYERS WHO FIGHT FOR ANTI-WATAN DROHIS-- AGAIN AND AGAIN .
WE WANT 75% ATTENDANCE TO BE MADE COMPULSORY IN JNU
OUR COLLEGIUM MELORDS SEEM TO BE BLISSFULLY UNAWARE OF CRONY CAPITLAISM IN INDIA.
A parliamentary standing committee, chaired by E. M. Sudarsana Natchiappan, stated that "to meet the ends of social justice and equity," the quota for the Scheduled Cates, the Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward Classes (OBCs) should be extended to the higher judiciary.
HEY HOW ABOUT ARMY GENERALS , BRAIN SURGEONS AND CRICKET TEAM TOO ?
CJI MELORD ARE THE INDIAN JUDGES HAVING A HIDDEN UNION ?
12 year ago, more than two dozen judges of the Punjab and Haryana High Court went on a mass leave. 25 judges of the Punjab and Haryana High Court took offence when the Chief Justice, B. K. Roy, issued notices to two judges of the high court, questioning them about accepting free membership to a private golf club on the outskirts of Chandigarh.
A public interest litigation (PIL) was pending against the golf club in the high court. The judges found the interference offensive and protested by going on mass leave.
President A.P.J. Kalam shot off a sharp and disapproving letter to the Chief Justice of India (CJI). Our current President would have continued walking on his lawns eating MISTI DOHI.
Striking might be a legitimate weapon of protest in a democracy,but workers going on strike and judges going on strike are a different kettle of fish.
Strikes as an instrument of protest are only legitimate for those sections of society that are either marginalised or trying for a collective bargain.
The judiciary does not fall in either category.
The judiciary is not a part of the working class. It forms the ruling establishment. It is odd for them to go on strike. Judges have routinely come down on workers and lawyers for using strikes as a mode of protest.
This one-day mass leave has eroded the common man’s faith in the judiciary. The judges have behaved like they were in a trade union let my JNU student Kanhaiya Kumar , by going on an arbitrary mass leave.
WE THE PEOPLE WILL NOT GET SURPRISED IF CM OF DELHI KHUJLIWAL GOES ON STRIKE.
THIS SLIME BALL IS THE MOST DANGEROUS MAN IN INDIA.
Melords, in a working democracy many matters and controversies are best resolved in non-judicial setting
Can you believe this? There was a Punjab and Haryana High Court order directing creation of posts of tractor driver to accommodate two gardeners employed on daily wages at a golf club run by the Haryana Tourism Corporation and were asked to perform the duties of tractor drivers.
Our constitution does not confer any authority or jurisdiction for Judicial 'activism'
THIS BLOGSITE WARNS THE COLLEGIUM JUDGES— IT IS VERY EASY TO CHERRYPICK AND PLAY TO THE GALLERY.
ANYBODY CAN DO THAT .THE EXECUTIVE TOO CAN DO THIS TO YOU.
LET NOT A DAY COME WHERE THE EXECUTIVE STARTS JUDGING , TO PAY YOU BACK IN THE SAME COIN.
WHEN THE SYSTEM BREAKS DOWN, THE JUDGE WILL RULE AND CALL FOR THE CRIMINAL TO BE ARRESTED . AND THE POLICE MAY SAY , YOU DO IT YOURSELF .
AT THE END OF THE MONTH, THE EXECUTIVE MAY WITHHOLD YOUR SALARY.
LET US NOT BREAK THE SYSTEM.
DO NOT LET THE JNU COMMIE PROFESSORS GET AWAY !
DO NOT LET THE JNU COMMIE PROFESSORS GET AWAY !
It was P N Bhagwati and VR Krishna Iyer who introduced the concepts of PIL and absolute liability to the Indian judicial system. Both wrangled India’s second highest civilian award , the Padma Vibhushan
The Melords never cared to control the loudspeakers in mosques –though they went hammer and tongs against every other loudspeaker.
In no Constitution in the world is the power to select and appoint judges conferred on the judges themselves and WE THE PEOPLE shall not have it in India.
The Supreme Court has made an order even in a military operation. In 1993, the Court issued orders on the conduct of military operations in Hazratbal shrine, Kashmir where the military had as a matter of strategy restricted the food supplies to hostages. The Court ordered that the provision of food of 1,200 calorific value should be supplied to hostages.
Commenting on this, an Army General wrote: “For the first time in history, a Court of Law was asked to pronounce judgment on the conduct of an ongoing military operation. Its verdict materially affected the course of operation.” This ruling we know was influenced by foreign forces—we will NOT have Judiciary interfering with India’s security ever again.
Even proceedings of Legislatures are controlled by the Court. In the Jharkhand Legislative Assembly case, the Supreme Court ordered the Assembly to conduct a Motion of Confidence and ordered the Speaker to conduct proceedings according to a prescribed agenda and not to entertain any other business.
Its proceedings were ordered to be recorded for reporting to the Court. These orders were made in spite of Article 212 of the Constitution which states that Courts are not to inquire into any proceedings of the legislature
While the Melords have come to recognize and enforce rights for the most disadvantaged sections in society through an expanded notion of ‘judicial review’— the COLLEGIUM judges must know, that like dowry complaints most of these dalit complaints ( led by foreign funded NGOs ) are also false.
The constitution clearly says that the executive will appoint judges after consulting the judiciary. Articles 124 and 217 are the relevant laws on the appointment of judges.
Article 124, inter alia, says:
“Every Judge of the Supreme Court shall be appointed by the President by warrant under his hand and seal after consultation with such of the judges of the Supreme Court and of the high courts in the states as the President may deem necessary for the purpose and shall hold office until he attains the age of 65 years: Provided that in the case of appointment of a judge other than the chief Justice, the chief Justice of India shall always be consulted.”
Article 217 says, inter alia: “Every judge of a high court shall be appointed by the President by warrant under his hand and seal after consultation with the Chief Justice of India, the Governor of the state, and, in the case of appointment of a judge other than the chief Justice, the chief Justice of the high court….”.
The constitution is clear that the executive appoints judges in consultation with the judiciary. Not the other way around.
It is worth noting that in the US, judge selection is entirely a political process (existing judges have no say) and in Britain (for England and Wales), the 15-member Judicial Appointments Commission has 15 members, among whom only five are judges. The chairman of the JAC is a lay person, and not a judge.
In contrast, in the Indian NJAC, the CJI is the head. There is no way anyone can say the new law diminishes the judiciary.
As the US and UK examples show, globally it is not judges who appoint judges. Moreover, democracy means laws are made by elected representatives, and not judges.
Judges only have to interpret the laws and check if they impinge on the basic freedoms guaranteed by the constitution. In recent years, judges have been foraying into DANG thing
VR Krishna Iyer was the law minister in India’s first Communist government—in Kerala—making him the only Supreme Court judge to have served as a politician prior to his appointment to the apex court.
In future we shall NOT have Judges with known hardcore political leanings.
His penchant to give succor to foreign black mambas at the expense of the watan is well known.
In 1987, VR Krishna Iyer stood as the combined opposition candidate in the presidential election, but lost to Congress candidate R. Venkataraman.
Quoting Winston Churchill to highlight the importance of free and fair elections in democracy, what VR Krishna Iyer wrote in a judgement in 1977 : “At the bottom of all tributes paid to democracy is the little man, walking into a little booth, with a little pencil, making a little cross on a little bit of paper—no amount of rhetoric or voluminous discussion can possibly diminish the overwhelming importance of the point.”
It cannot be any job of the judiciary to thwart the people’s will. The will of the people means the right to change the laws – as long as they are not in contravention of the basic features of the constitution.
The NJAC may not be the best thing to happen to judicial appointments, but it is ANYDAY better than the opaque collegium system. We can fix the warts once they are visible.
A weakened political class has over the last 3 decades meekly surrendered to judicial supremacy. But now Modi has a FULL majority in the Lok Sabha.
WE THE PEOPLE expect him to set right this bullshit system where lawyer turned judges play god.
EVER HEARD OF JUSTICE MOHIT SHAH ?
LONG LIVE OUR MELORDS !
Centre for Public Interest Litigation is a TROJAN HORE NGO that keeps filing PIL.
Exasperated the current CJI T Thakur asked-
“Are you a professional litigant? What is the process (of filing cases)? Is there scrutiny?,” “You shouldn’t become an instrument in the hands of other interests.”
The CPIL was established by late Justice V. M. Tarkunde, a former judge of the Supreme Court of India.
Tarkunde was a founder of People's Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL ) along with Jayaprakash Narayan, ( a CIA spook ).
Arun Jaitley, Arun Shourie were all part of PUCL.
Dr Binayak Sen the NAXAL THINKER was National Vice-President of the Union of PUCL and neatly placed a General Secretary of its Chhattisgarh unit— the naxal HUB.
In 2010, NAXAL THINKER Binayak Sen was convicted of sedition and sentenced to life imprisonment. After his conviction, he was later released on bail by the Supreme Court of India without any reasons – mind you, JEW NOAM CHOMSKY had put pressure.
Other founder members of PUCL were senior advocates and MEDIA DARLINGS including Fali Sam Nariman, Shanti Bhushan, Colin Gonsalves.
COMMIE Justice VM Tarkunde was a board member for the International Humanist and Ethical Union(IHEU), the world union of Humanist organisations for over 40 years.
Tarkunde was a sidekick of Rothschild’ stooge MN Roy, the founder of Indian Communism who had a HONEY POT JEWESS mistress Evelyn Trent.
In 2007, Prashant Bhushan of the CPIL filed a petition with the Delhi High Court to investigate whether there had been kickbacks in the 2005 Scorpene submarine deal.
The High Court took a strong line with the investigating agency, saying "We feel dissatisfied with that you've done so far. If you've tried to shield someone, then we will come down very heavily on you"
When AAP Law Minister Somnath Bharti raided a SEX AND DRUGS den of African whores, these are the kingpins who went hammer and tongs against him.
Jagmati Sangwan, All India Democratic Women’s Association (AIDWA)
Annie Raja, National Federation of Indian Women (NFIW)
Kavita Krishnan, All India Progressive Women’s Association (AIPWA)
Shabnam Hashmi, Act Now For Harmony and Democracy (ANHAD)
Indu Agnihotri, Centre for Women’s Development Student (CWDS)
Kavita Shrivastava, People’s Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL)
Sunita Dhar, Jagori
Jyotsana Chatterjee, Joint Women’s Programme (JWP)
Leila Passah, Young Women’s Christian Association (YWCA)
EVERY PUCL MEMBER IS RABIDLY ANTI-MODI--
WHAT WAS ARUN JAITLEY DOING IN THIS GROUP?
WHENEVER OUR JAWANS KILL NAXALS, FOREIGN FUNDED TROJAN HORSE NGOs GET FAKE WITNESSES OUT OF THIN AIR , AND FILE A PIL CHARGING “FAKE ENCOUNTER”.
THIS MUST STOP.
OUR SECURITY AGENCIES KNOW THE NAXAL SYMPATHISER JUDGES, WHO LIVE BEYOND THEIR MONTH END SALARIES.
ONE DAY THEY WILL RETIRE , RIGHT ?
WHERE WILL THEY RUN ?
WE KNOW WHICH ALL HIGH PROFIE LAWYERS ARE IN THE PAYROLL FOR DEFENDING NAXALS .
TODAY NAXALS GENERATE FUNDS BY MILKING THE MINING BARONS WHO ARE MERE BENAMI FRONTS FOR FOREIGN FORCES .
THERE IS A DOUBLE GAME GOING ON.
IF WE DID NOT HAVE NAXAL SAVING JUDGES , WE COULD HAVE ELIMINATED THIS CANCER LONG AGO.
IF WE DID NOT HAVE NAXAL SAVING JUDGES , WE COULD HAVE ELIMINATED THIS CANCER LONG AGO.
MELORDS OF THE “COLLEGIUM “ COURT— WE THE PEOPLE WILL NOT ALLOW YOU THE UNELECTED TO MESS AROUND WITH THE ELECTED EXECUTIVE.
DON’T TRY AND MAKE OUR VOTES INVALID --
WE WONT ALLOW IT.TO BE CONTINUED
CAPT AJIT VADAKAYIL