Answer CJI - Loya Murder
DALIT ONLINE – e News Weekly
Spreading the light of humanity & freedom
Editor: Nagaraja.M.R.. Vol.14..Issue.17........29 / 04 / 2018
Answer CJI Dipak Mishra – Judge Loya Murder
Committing a crime is an offence. Covering up a crime is one more offence. Please keep that in mind & answer the following questions. Do remember that before law , everybody commonman , police , judges , ministers all are equal & must be treated as equals. But since independence to curry favors certain public servants treat others with power as more than equals by making weird interpretations of law. If this petitioner ( NAGARAJA MYSURU RAGHUPATHI) or any other petitioners , truth seekers or any of their family meet with untoward incidents Chief Justice of India DIPAK MISHRA together with his bench colleagues in the case and jurisdiction police will be fully responsible for it. Don’t try to silence with brute police force by slapping contempt charges or any charges. We have whole hearted respects to HONEST FEW in judiciary , police & public service. But we don’t respect the corrupt who are making contempt of citizens of india & contempt of constitution of india.
Now , CJI Dipak Mishra ANSWER the following :
1. Sohrabuddin/Tulsirram Prajapati fake encounter case was transferred from Gujarat to CBI court, Mumbai by the Supreme Court in the year 2012, directing that same judge will preside over the trial from start to finish. Judge Utpat was designated as special CBI Judge in Mumbai. He allegedly reprimanded the accused for not appearing in his court and fixed the case for June 26, 2014. A day before, on June 25, 2014, he was abruptly transferred. Judge B.H. Loya was posted in his place. Judge Loya died in suspicious circumstances on November 30, 2014. Post that, shri Amit Shah has been since discharged and CBI refused to file an appeal against the order of the discharge.
2. Sister of Judge Loya gave an interview to a media house on November 21, 2017, to allege that he was being offered a Rs 100-crore bribe plus residential flat/property in Mumbai for delivering a verdict in favour of the accused by a former chief justice.
3. Judge Loya was stated to have died on account of heart attack. ECG and histopathology report of Judge Loya showed no evidence of heart attack. On the contrary, Dr R.K. Sharma, ex-head of Forensics & Toxicology at AIIMS stated that there was no evidence of heart attack and there was evidence of ‘possible trauma to the brain’.
4. Judge Loya’s security was withdrawn on November 24, 2014 in Mumbai and he was not provided any security as he travelled from Mumbai to Nagpur, where he died on November 30, 2014.
5. There is no travel record of Judge Loya travelling by train from Mumbai to Nagpur.
6. There is no entry or record of Judge Loya having stayed in the occupancy register of Ravi Bhavan, Nagpur on November 30, 2014. Fifteen employees posted in Ravi Bhavan, Nagpur did not even recall that Judge Loya ever stayed in Ravi Bhavan.
7. There was no reason for three judges to sleep in a room with only two beds when adjoining rooms were empty. Why did the 15 members of the staff then not know either about the stay or the heart attack? Why were no entries made in the occupancy register?
8. Family of Judge Loya has publicaly stated that clothes on his dead body had blood stains, especially near the neck area.
9. Post-mortem of Judge Loya was conducted on December 1, 2014 without information and consent of any immediate family members. There were discrepancies even in recording of Judge Loya’s name in post-mortem report.
10. Two of the other colleagues of Judge Loya, who were allegedly informed about the pressure being put on him, also died under suspicious circumstances. One associate, advocate Khandalkar’s body was found in district court, Nagpur after alleged fall from the eighth story on November 29, 2015. (November 28, 2015 was closed court work and he was missing for two days). Second associate, retired Judge Thombre died in suspicious circumstances while travelling in train from Nagpur to Bangalore on May 16, 2016. There is no FIR or an investigation in these deaths till date. One advocate Satish Uke, raising the issue narrowly escaped death when on July 8, 2016, heavy weight iron material of 5,000 kgs fell on his office.
VAKASHA SACHDEVUPDATED: 19.04.18
OPINION6 min read
(In light of four sitting SC judges saying their letter to the CJI expressing concerns about the functioning of the judiciary is related in part to the Judge Loya case, The Quint is republishing the following article originally posted on 24 November 2017.)
The Caravan this week published a series of stories on the death of CBI special judge BH Loya in December 2014. Journalist Niranjan Takle has spoken extensively to the family of Judge Loya, who, before he died, was presiding over the high-profile Sohrabuddin Sheikh encounter killing case – in which a prime accused was BJP President Amit Shah. Shah was discharged by the judge who succeeded Judge Loya.
The revelations made by Judge Loya’s sisters, father and others form the basis of the stories. These, along with Takle’s own investigation, who spoke to officials in Nagpur who dealt with Loya’s body after he was found dead, raise several grave questions.
1. Why was Judge JT Utpat, Judge Loya’s predecessor in hearing the case, transferred from hearing the case despite a 2012 Supreme Court order specifying that the same judge should hear the matter from start to finish?
2. Were Bombay High Court Chief Justice Mohit Shah or the principal accused Amit Shah aware of any alleged inducements offered to Judge Loya to ensure a favourable judgment in the case?
3. Does Justice Mohit Shah deny the allegation by Judge Loya’s sister Anuradha Biyani, that he himself made an offer of Rs 100 crore in return for a favourable judgment?
[Takle had received no response from Justice Shah at the time of publication of the article mentioning this allegation]
4. Who made the arrangements for Judge Loya’s transportation to Dande Hospital on the night of his death, and why was this not in a vehicle from the government guest house or an ambulance?
5. Do Dande Hospital and/or Meditrina Hospital have records indicating what medication was provided to Judge Loya while in their care, and who was with him at the time?
6. What was the time of Judge Loya’s death according to the records of Meditrina Hospital and when do call records show this was intimated to Judge Loya’s family? Did the death occur at 6:15 am or before 5 am on 1 December 2014, or did it in fact occur before midnight?
[Judge Loya’s family says they received calls informing them of his death from 5 am in the morning onwards, but the post-mortem report specifies the time of death as 6:15 am, and other sources informed Takle that Judge Loya passed away before midnight]
The Quint has not conducted an independent corroboration of the claims made in the articles, and therefore does not affirm the truth of such claims. These include alleged discrepancies between the post-mortem report and the condition of Judge Loya’s body and clothes, as well as allegations that the then Chief Justice of the Bombay High Court offered monetary inducements to Judge Loya to give a favourable judgment.
Nonetheless, the gravity of these claims (several of which are made on video here), which strike at the very heart of the judicial system if true, necessitates that they be investigated properly at the very least.
7. In what circumstances can a person die of “coronary artery insufficiency”? Is it possible for a person in good physical health without any cardiac history or other markers of this condition, experience “coronary artery insufficiency” and lose their life?
[Judge Loya’s sister, a doctor, claims that Judge Loya had no medical history consistent with the condition, and that this raised doubts as to whether this could be the cause of death]
8. Why was a post-mortem report ordered into Judge Loya’s death when no panchnama or FIR was filed terming it a suspicious death, and why was Judge Loya’s family not informed about the performance of a post-mortem? Alternatively, were any reasons for performance of post-mortem report recorded, where were these recorded and who recorded them?
9. Who signed the post-mortem report pages as “maiyatacha chulatbhau” (ie paternal cousin brother of the deceased) when no relation of Judge Loya was present in Nagpur? Does the countersignatory, the senior police inspector of Sadar police station, recollect who this was?
10. What was Ishwar Baheti’s relationship with the deceased and on what basis was he coordinating the funeral arrangements for Judge Loya, including contacting the family? Why was Judge Loya’s phone returned to the family by Mr Baheti rather than the police? Alternatively, did the police ask Mr Baheti to return the phone to Judge Loya’s family?
11. Does Judge Loya’s family still have the allegedly bloodstained shirt worn by Judge Loya at the time of death which the post-mortem report claims was dry?
12. Is it true that the CBI was only given 15 minutes to argue against the discharge of Amit Shah in subsequent hearings of the case before Judge Loya’s successor in hearing the case, Judge Gosavi, as against three days for the defence lawyers?
13. Who made the decision to announce MS Dhoni’s retirement from test cricket on 30 December 2014? Was this decided by the player or the BCCI and did any external source suggest the specific date?
[Judge Loya’s sister alleges that Judge Loya was informed that if he would deliver the judgment in the case before 30 December 2014, it would not be under focus because another news story would dominate the headlines and distract focus from the judgment]
VAKASHA SACHDEVUPDATED: 1 DAY AGO
OPINION4 min read
Finance Minister Arun Jaitley has published certain comments in response to the Supreme Court’s dismissal of the petitions requesting an independent investigation into the death of Judge Loya, as well as the motion to impeach Chief Justice of India Dipak Misra.
I would humbly like to submit 16 questions in response to the points raised by him, under each of the headings used by him, which are as follows:
If the evidence against Amit Shah in the Sohrabuddin Sheikh encounter case was so flimsy that “any court would have discharged” him, then why did the Supreme Court, when passing its judgment of 27 September 2012, hold that proper adjudication of the submissions on both sides needed to be done at trial (para 29)? Further, when considering the issue of cancelling bail, why did the Supreme Court say then that “the apprehension expressed by the CBI that Amitbhai Shah may misuse the freedom and try to subvert the prosecution cannot be lightly brushed aside” (para 30)?
Since you mention the testimony of the Patel brothers, do you not find any contradiction in Judge Gosavi’s observations regarding their testimony while discharging Amit Shah? On the one hand, he dismissed the three statements by each of the Patel brothers because they were exactly the same, but also said improvements were made on them.
Leaving aside the merits of the Judge Loya case, do you think the Supreme Court could arrive at a definitive conclusion on whether a person’s death was from natural causes or not, without the recording of evidence in the form of affidavits, statements on oath, cross-examination of witnesses etc?
Do you agree that the statements of the four district judges to the Maharashtra ‘discreet inquiry’ did not need to be recorded as affidavits because of concerns over the petitioner’s bona fides?
Is it legally established to give statements of judicial officers not made in their official capacity more weight than statements of other citizens?
What specific falsehoods do you find in The Caravan’s story of 20 November 2017 that raised questions about the issue, apart from the mode of travel to Dande Hospital?
If the statements of the judges are to be given preference over others, what about the statement of Judge Rathi, who said that no ECG was conducted at Dande Hospital (with the specific mention of nodes of the machine), which contradicts the statements of other judges?
Would you like to name the lawyers you have termed “Institution Disruptors”? Why have you not named them if their motives are so clearly mala fide?
You note that the “Institution Disruptors” pick up “false causes”. But why is the Judge Loya case an example of this, when the only request was for an independent investigation into the case?
Do you agree with the Supreme Court’s decision to take into account the bona fides of the petitioners when deciding the Judge Loya case, despite a statement by Chief Justice of India Dipak Misra on 19 February 2018 during proceedings that the Court would not, in fact, be concerned with the petitioners’ bona fides?
Article 124(4) of the Constitution and the Judges (Inquiry) Act 1968 use the phrase “proven misbehaviour” rather than “proven misconduct”. Don’t they?
Further, isn’t the proof of misbehaviour or incapacity to be presented to Parliament after the investigation under the Judges (Inquiry) Act 1968, which comes after moving a motion to impeach, rather than before moving it as you suggest?
You note that the charges read out are issues which have been settled by judicial orders or precedent. Can we have reference to judicial orders or precedents in relation to each of the five charges mentioned in the motion – in particular Charge 3 (ante-dating of the note) and Charge 4 (delay in returning land wrongly allocated)?
Which comment on the Judge Loya case do you refer to when you say that the four senior judges should have checked before making comments about the case? Wasn’t the only mention of the Judge Loya case on that day a single response of “Yes” from Justice Gogoi as to whether or not the judges considered the assignment of that case an example of assignments they were concerned about?
Do your reservations about the Judge Loya case mean that you disagree with all points raised by the four judges in the Press Conference, even though the letter setting out their concerns that was released that day was written a few months prior to the Press Conference, and makes no reference to the Judge Loya case?
You note that the judges should have checked the facts of the Judge Loya case before commenting on it – given that their concerns related to the listing of the case and not its merits. What factual aspects of the case should they have referred to – and from where, since the findings of the discreet inquiry weren’t made available to them or the public at the time?
New Delhi: Citing the statements of two judges of the Bombay high court and enquiries by its own reporters, the Indian Express on Monday said that there was “nothing suspicious” about the death three years ago of Judge B.H. Loya, who was presiding over the CBI court in the Sohrabuddin Sheikh fake encounter case.
In two reports last week, the Caravan had quoted immediate members of Loya’s family, who questioned the circumstances surrounding his death and said that the judge had been offered Rs 100 crore to give an order favourable to the prime accused, BJP president Amit Shah. The judge passed away on December 1, 2014 after a heart attack while in Nagpur to attend a colleague’s daughter’s wedding. In interviews to the magazine’s reporter, Niranjan Takle, members of Loya’s family listed what they said were inconsistencies in the facts surrounding his death.
Questioning the Caravan’s account, however, the Indian Express has said that Justice Bhushan Gavai and Justice Sunil Shukre – “who were there at the hospital when Loya died” – told its reporters that there was nothing suspicious about the judge’s death.
The Indian Express has also questioned some of the claims made in the Caravan report, citing official records and doctors who attended to Loya.
Speaking to The Wire, Caravan political editor Hartosh Singh Bal questioned how the judges quoted by Indian Express suddenly entered the picture. “These judges were not quoted in any other report. They were not with Loya at the guest house or the first hospital. They were not the first judges on the scene. How did the Indian Express reporter suddenly come across them? Did the reporter find them or did they contact the reporter? If they contacted the reporter, why did they not hold a press conference instead?”
It would be jumping the gun, however, to assume that all the apparent questions around the judge’s death have now been resolved. Here’s a list of seven discrepancies that have emerged from the media reports, and the questions that still remain.
1. Loya experiences chest pain. How did he get to hospital?
According to the Indian Express, Loya, who was staying at the Ravi Bhavan VIP guest house in Nagpur at the time, complained of chest pain at around 4 am. With Loya were his fellow judges Shridhar Kulkarni and Shriram Madhusudan Modak, Justice Gavai told the newspaper. According to Justice Shukre, Vijaykumar Barde, a local judge, drove Loya to Dande Hospital in his own car. Justice Gavai said there was another car too which accompanied them, which belonged to Rupesh Rathi, at the time the deputy registrar of the Nagpur bench of the high court.
The Caravan report, however, stated that Loya was taken to Dande Hospital in an auto – or so his family was apparently told. The family, particularly Loya’s sister Anuradha Biyani, questioned why he had to be taken to hospital that way, particularly when the auto stand closest to the guest house is two kms away. The Caravan story does not say who was Biyani’s source.
In its follow-up investigation, NDTV spoke to staff members at the guest house on condition of anonymity. “At Ravi Bhawan, staff members who were present at the time and wished to remain unnamed told NDTV that there are no designated drivers in Ravi Bhawan, and Loya did not appear to have a car specially assigned to him for the trip either,” the channel reported.
It is not clear if the staff NDTV spoke to were thus confirming Loya went to the hospital by auto or were simply answering in the abstract. Either way, if indeed Loya was driven to hospital that fateful night, that fact seems not to have registered in their mind.
Google Maps shows Dande hospital to be a six minute drive away. Given that Loya is said to have arrived there “around 4:45 or 5:00 am”, the vehicle that apparently took him would have left the guest house around 4:40-4:55, a full 40-55 minutes after Loya first complained of acute chest pain. Why the VIP guest house staff could not arrange a vehicle any sooner is not clear.
2. At Dande hospital, ECG or no ECG?
According to the Caravan report, which is based on what his family was later told, no ECG was performed at Dande Hospital as the machine was not working. Loya was instead given some medicines there and then shifted to another private hospital, Meditrina. In an interview to The Wire, Bal of the Caravan said the reporter went by what the family had been told.
The Indian Express, however, claims that an ECG was performed at Dande Hospital and the newspaper reproduced a copy of the report. The newspaper quoted the director of the hospital, Pinak Dande, as saying that the ECG revealed that Loya needed specialised cardiac treatment, which was not available at the hospital.
The ECG. Credit: Indian Express
Curiously, the ECG published by the Indian Express is time-stamped “05:11, November 30”, i.e. a day before Loya was taken to hospital. The newspaper does not explain the reason for the wrong date – given the role ECGs play in helping doctors review a patient’s case history, it is unusual for the date to be off . The judge’s name is also spelt incorrectly on the ECG report.
After the discrepancy attracted widespread criticism on social media, the Indian Express sought an explanation from the hospital about why the date of the ECG was wrong. This is what the hospital’s administrator said:
“The date November 30 appearing on the ECG may have been due to a technical glitch arising out of a machine calibration issue. We recalibrate our machines every three months or so to prevent such glitches. But sometimes the glitch may occur in the intervening period. We stand by the fact that the ECG was taken at our hospital on December 1.”
3. Declared dead at Meditrina hospital
Both the Caravan and the Indian Express reports agree that when Loya was subsequently taken to Meditrina – a larger private hospital in Nagpur – he was declared dead on arrival. Meditrina records quoted by the Express say that the judge suffered “retrosternal chest pain and had collapsed” en route, and attempts to resuscitate him at the hospital failed.
It was at Meditrina, according to the Indian Express, that the other high court judges, including Shukre and Gavai, arrived. Shukre told the newspaper Loya was in the ICU when they arrived and “All attempts were made to save his life but to no avail. Doctors did their best and the judges’ community did their best to help”.
4. Time of death
According to the Indian Express report, the Meditrina hospital authorities declared Loya dead a little after 6 am. The Caravan notes that the official time of Loya’s death is recorded as 6:15 am. However, family members told Caravan that they began receiving telephone calls at around 5 am from Barde – the judge who according to Indian Express had been with Loya since he left Ravi Bhavan – informing them that Loya had died and that they should rush from Latur to Nagpur:
Sarita Mandhane, another of Loya’s sisters, who runs a tuition centre in Aurangabad and was visiting Latur at the time, told [Caravan] that she received a call from Barde at around 5 am, informing her that Loya had died. “He said that Brij has passed away in Nagpur and asked us to rush to Nagpur,” she said.
Before they could leave for Nagpur, though, another person Ishwar Baheti – described by Loya’s sister Anuradha Biyani as an “RSS worker” – somehow located them. Baheti told them that he had been talking to people in Nagpur and there was no reason for them to go as the body was already being brought to Gategaon, Loya’s sister Sarita Mandhane told Caravan. The Indian Express report made no reference to Baheti, or the calls the family received in the morning. Though Baheti appears as a mysterious person in the Caravan account, NDTV’s report says he was a family friend and was known to Loya and some of his relatives.
So far, however, neither Barde nor Baheti has spoken to the media to clear up some of the questions and doubts raised by Loya’s family. Though Caravan quoted Sarita Mandhane as saying she was informed by Barde of her brother’s death at 5 am, the magazine does not appear to have asked Barde about the timing of his call.
5. Post mortem and after
Apart from Sarita Mandhane, who says she received word of Loya’s death at 5 am, other family members quoted in the Caravan report say they were informed about Loya’s death after the post mortem had already been conducted. The post-mortem report – which said that the death was caused by cardiac arrest – was signed apparently by a paternal cousin of Loya’s, but his father told the magazine that he had no such relative in Nagpur at the time.
Both NDTV and the Indian Express have tracked down the person who signed the post mortem report – one Prashant Rathi, who is a doctor. Rathi collected the body. Rathi said that an uncle (‘mausa‘) of his, Rukmesh Pannalal Jakotia, called him in the morning and told him that his (the uncle’s) cousin (Loya) was in hospital and that Rathi should go and help him. Apparently when Rathi arrived at the hospital and told Jakotia that Loya had died, his uncle asked him to take care of the formalities, and so he agreed to sign off on the post mortem when doctors asked.
What is not clear from the Indian Express report is how Rathi’s uncle learned of Loya’s condition when his immediate family (other than one sister) had not been informed, nor how the government hospital which conducted the post-mortem satisfied itself that Rathi was indeed a close relative and that the body could be released to him without even talking to any of Loya’s close family members.
6. Blood on the judge’s clothes
The Caravan had quoted Loya’s sister Biyani as saying that the family found blood stains on the judge’s shirt, on the neck and at the back. Other family members also said they saw there was an injury on his head:
A diary entry by Biyani from the time reads, “There was blood on his collar. His belt was twisted in the opposite direction, and the pant clip is broken. Even my uncle feels that this is suspicious.” Harkishan [Loya’s father] told [Caravan], “There were bloodstains on the clothes.” Mandhane said that she, too, saw “blood on the neck.” She said that “there was blood and an injury on his head … on the back side,” and that “his shirt had blood spots.” Harkishan said, “His shirt had blood on it from his left shoulder to his waist.”
The Indian Express quoted a government forensic expert, who said that “Blood is bound to spill out during post-mortem as we open all major cavities in the body. Sometimes, if small gaps remain in the sutures, blood might seep out.”
Rathi – the ‘relative’ who signed the post-mortem – told the Indian Express that Loya’s body was wrapped in a sheet when he took custody and presumably that is the state in which it was loaded on to the ambulance for transport back to his father’s village. Though Caravan‘s story does not describe what the body was covered in when it was received by his family members at Gategaon and creates the impression that it was fully clothed, Vinod Jose, editor of the magazine, told The Wire that Loya’s body came wrapped in a sheet and that his clothes were in a packet. Any blood that might have spilt out “during post-mortem” would not have been on his clothes which had already been removed and packed. In other words, the apprehension is that the blood stains in Loya’s shirt might be ante-mortem.
7. Transporting the body
According to Biyani, quoted in the Caravan report, Loya’s body was transported unaccompanied, except for the ambulance driver. Neither Barde nor the two judges whom he was travelling with in Nagpur accompanied him, she alleged.
However, according to the Indian Express and Justice Gavai, two judges did accompany Loya’s body. “The two judges were Yogesh Rahangdale and Swayam Chopda, both civil judges, junior division. An air-conditioned ambulance was arranged with provision of ice slabs in case the AC failed along the way,” the newspaper quoted Gavai as saying. The report also said that the two judges met Loya’s father in Gategaon. NDTV also reported something similar:
Shivaji Bhokde the joint commissioner of Nagpur police told NDTV that two judiciary officials, and a police constable were inside the ambulance with the driver on the 10-and-a-half hour drive to Latur.
According to Justice Gavai, the two judiciary officials and the constable – whose name he also remembered three years later – were not inside the ambulance but travelling in a separate car. “The car developed a snag a little beyond Nanded,” Justice Gavai told the Indian Express. “When the ambulance reached Latur, fellow judges were present to receive it. The two accompanying judges reached late along with the constable Prashant Tulsiram Thakre.
8. Other issues that remain
Bribery claims: The allegation by Loya’s relatives that the judge had been offered a bribe by the former chief justice of the Bombay high court remain unaddressed so far, and the chief justice in question has chosen not to speak on the matter.
Telephone data: Loya’s relatives also told Caravan that his phone was only returned to them 2-3 days after his death and that the data appeared to have been deleted.
Silence of wife and son: Caravan said Loya’s wife and son “feared for their lives” and hence declined to speak to their reporter. But the magazine did carry details of the letter written by the son to the chief justice of the Bombay high court asking for his father’s death to be probed.
Three years later, with claims and counter-claims over the controversial case piling up, the son’s February 2015 plea for an independent investigation might well be the only way to settle this matter one way or another.
Editorial : SCI Covers-up Judge Loya Case
- Review Judge Loya case
Access to FREE & FAIR Justice is a constitutional right of every Indian citizen. It is also his Human Right. Justice can be done only through impartial investigation & trial of a case. Take the case of Judge Loya , his unnatural death ( murder ?) in unbelievable circumstances definitely necessitates an impartial investigation.
Recent Supreme Court of India decision to dismiss all PILs concerning Judge Loya is unethical , Inhuman. Can a doctor without doing medical check up of patient say whether a patient is healthy or not ?
There are many inconsistencies in the case by government , police , prosecution. Still supreme court accepts those inconsistencies as right. Supreme court accepts sayings of 4 Bombay Judges as cardinal truth. If at all as the supreme court says everything is right , Judge Loya died naturally why it is shunning away from an impartial investigation. Then Truth will come out and all the judges concerned will achieve true glory with this litmus test. Don’t worry about expenses anyway Judges , VVIP public servants are wasting crores of rupees public money on foreign jaunts , lavish life styles.
This gross dismissal of PILs by SCI is nothing but ultimate cover up. This in itself proves that there is something amiss in Judge Loya’s Death. Gone are the days when Judges were respected as Gods and their words were respected by heart. Behaviour of Judges nowadays is far from that , now we have judges selected through criminal means , judges copying in exams , match fixing judges , judges asking for sexual favors , judges fudging bills , judges lying on false affidavits, judges swindling employees PF money . Powers that be help these judges to escape legal prosecution , promote them , in turn the said judges reciprocate by making favorable judgements to the powers that be. All Judges are NOT Satya Harishchandras. It is going on since decades irrespective of political party in power. So words , deeds of judges cann’t be taken as true at face value. It must be thoroughly examined.
CJI Dipak Mishra himself is alleged of involvement in land scam , kalikho pul suicide (?) , medical college bribery case. Still he was promoted , what else can we citizens of india can expect from him ?
Even on mere suspicion in a case common people / Innocents are arrested by police , tortured , spend years in jail. Police do investigation. Prosecution cites many clauses of law , Judge makes tough interpretations of law. Here in Judge Loya’s case there are many inconsistencies which prima facie points towards something amiss and warrants an investigation. The cover up act of SCI strengthens the suspicion further. Review Judge Loya’s Death case & order for an impartial investigation into it. Orelse Judges , SCI will be remembered in history not as national heroes.
Few persons pursuing Judge Loya’s case died mysteriously. If any further deaths of petitioners , persons connected with it happens , Chief Justice of India Dipak Mishra will be responsible for it together with persons committing the crime.
Our whole hearted respects to Honest few in Judiciary , Police & Public service and it is an appeal to those honest few to catch their corrupt colleagues.
Interrogate Chief Justice of India
https://sites.google.com/site/dalitoonline/interrogate-chief-justice
Jail CJI Mishra
https://sites.google.com/site/dalitoonline/jail-cji-mishra
https://sites.google.com/site/dalitoonline/jail-chief-justice
Judge’s MAFIA & Loya Murder
https://sites.google.com/site/dalitoonline/judge-s-mafia-loya-murder
Your’s
Nagaraja Mysuru Raghupathi
PIL – Review Judge Loya Case & Prosecute Chief Justice of India
An Appeal to all Honourable Judges of Supreme Court of India
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. OF 2018
IN THE MATTER OF
NAGARAJA . M.R
editor , DALIT ONLINE ,
# LIG 2 , No 761 ,, HUDCO First Stage , Laxmikantanagar ,
Hebbal , Mysuru – 570017 , Karnataka State
....Petitioner
Versus
Justice Dipak Mishra
Honourable Chief Justice of India & Others
....Respondents
PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 12 to ARTICLE 35 & ARTICLE 51A OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS UNDER ARTICLE 32 & ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA.
To ,
All Honourable Judges of Supreme Court of India.
The Humble petition of the Petitioner above named.
MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH :
1. Facts of the case:
"Power will go to the hands of rascals, , rogues and freebooters. All Indian leaders will be of low calibre and men of straw. They will have sweet tongues and silly hearts. They will fight among themselves for power and will be lost in political squabbles . A day would come when even air & water will be taxed." Sir Winston made this statement in the House of Commons just before the independence of India & Pakistan. Sadly , the forewarning of Late Winston Churchill has been proved right by some of our criminal , corrupt public servants.
In his death note Former Arunachal Pradesh Chief Minister Mr.Kalikho Pul has clearly alleged involvement of CJI Khehar , President Mukherjee & others in the crime.
Justice Karnan was silenced for asking for investigations into corruption by higher judges. Judge Prabhakar Gwal dismissed from post for initiating legal prosecution of powers that be , higher judges. Judge Loya MURDERED (?) for not toeing the line , favorable judgement for powers that be , higher judges.
Advocates who raise their voice seeking truth face tormented in many ways. Certain advocates great intellectuals (?) take the side of powers that be , guilty judges and pass unfounded comments , rhetoric against the truth seekers. These type of advocates question the locus standi of petitioners. First of all what locus standi these advocates have to silence the voices seeking truth ? Are these advocates giving Service Invoices to their customers / clients for the fees paid / Are they paying tax properly ? Mr.Ram Jethmalani when he himself has failed in his own domain made irresponsible comment taht Justice Karnan is of unsound mind. Is Mr.Ram Jethmalani a qualified doctor ? One High Court Advocate Mr.Mishra threatened this petitioner for seeking prosecution of Dipak Mishra.
These type of few advocates , intellectuals are parasites who thrive on our corrupt legal system. They don’t want transparency , as it will stop their illegal income / favors . These type of advocates , judges are bringing disrepute to honest advocates , honest judges and to the bar & the bench.
- Review Judge Loya case
Access to FREE & FAIR Justice is a constitutional right of every Indian citizen. It is also his Human Right. Justice can be done only through impartial investigation & trial of a case. Take the case of Judge Loya , his unnatural death ( murder ?) in unbelievable circumstances definitely necessitates an impartial investigation.
Recent Supreme Court of India decision to dismiss all PILs concerning Judge Loya is unethical , Inhuman. Can a doctor without doing medical check up of patient say whether a patient is healthy or not ?
There are many inconsistencies in the case by government , police , prosecution. Still supreme court accepts those inconsistencies as right. Supreme court accepts sayings of 4 Bombay Judges as cardinal truth. If at all as the supreme court says everything is right , Judge Loya died naturally why it is shunning away from an impartial investigation. Then Truth will come out and all the judges concerned will achieve true glory with this litmus test. Don’t worry about expenses anyway Judges , VVIP public servants are wasting crores of rupees public money on foreign jaunts , lavish life styles.
This gross dismissal of PILs by SCI is nothing but ultimate cover up. This in itself proves that there is something amiss in Judge Loya’s Death. Gone are the days when Judges were respected as Gods and their words were respected by heart. Behaviour of Judges nowadays is far from that , now we have judges selected through criminal means , judges copying in exams , match fixing judges , judges asking for sexual favors , judges fudging bills , judges lying on false affidavits, judges swindling employees PF money . Powers that be help these judges to escape legal prosecution , promote them , in turn the said judges reciprocate by making favorable judgements to the powers that be. All Judges are NOT Satya Harishchandras. It is going on since decades irrespective of political party in power. So words , deeds of judges cann’t be taken as true at face value. It must be thoroughly examined.
CJI Dipak Mishra himself is alleged of involvement in land scam , kalikho pul suicide (?) , medical college bribery case. Still he was promoted , what else can we citizens of india can expect from him ?
Even on mere suspicion in a case common people / Innocents are arrested by police , tortured , spend years in jail. Police do investigation. Prosecution cites many clauses of law , Judge makes tough interpretations of law. Here in Judge Loya’s case there are many inconsistencies which prima facie points towards something amiss and warrants an investigation. The cover up act of SCI strengthens the suspicion further. Review Judge Loya’s Death case & order for an impartial investigation into it. Orelse Judges , SCI will be remembered in history not as national heroes.
Few persons pursuing Judge Loya’s case died mysteriously. If any further deaths of petitioners , persons connected with it happens , Chief Justice of India Dipak Mishra will be responsible for it together with persons committing the crime.
Our whole hearted respects to Honest few in Judiciary , Police & Public service and it is an appeal to those honest few to catch their corrupt colleagues.
Interrogate Chief Justice of India
https://sites.google.com/site/dalitoonline/interrogate-chief-justice
Jail CJI Mishra
https://sites.google.com/site/dalitoonline/jail-cji-mishra
https://sites.google.com/site/dalitoonline/jail-chief-justice
Judge’s MAFIA & Loya Murder
https://sites.google.com/site/dalitoonline/judge-s-mafia-loya-murder
2. Question(s) of Law:
As per constitution of India , are not all citizens of india equal before law ?
3. Grounds:
Requests for equitable justice. Prosecution of corrupt Judges , CJI Dipak Mishra , Former President Mukherjee & Corrupt Public Servants.
4. Averment:
Hereby , I do request the honorable supreme court of India to consider this as a PIL for : “writ of Mandamus” and to issue instructions to the concerned public servants in the cases to perform their duties.
PRAYER:
In the above premises, it is prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased:
a . Hereby , I do request the honorable supreme court of India to consider this as a PIL for : “writ of Mandamus” and to issue instructions to the concerned public servants , in the case to perform their duties. To review the PILs concerning Judge Loya’s death.
b. To register FIR against Chief Justice of India Dipak Mishra , Former President of India Mukherjee & others and arrest them for legal prosecution.
c. To constitute an impartial investigation team to investigate the crimes – Judge Loya Murder , Sohrabuddin fake encounter case , Chief Minister Kalikho Pul Suicide , Land scam of CJI Mishra , Birla Sahara diary , Medical college scam and the crime cover ups by high ranking judges , powers that be . The team must be accountable to the public.
d. to protect the human rights , constitutional rights of advocates , petitioners who are seeking truth in the above cases.
e. to initiate criminal legal prosecution against great (?) advocates , intellectuals (?) who irresponsibly comment against truth seekers , who try to bar truth seeking advocates from practicing , from filing PILs in courts.
d . to pass such other orders and further orders as may be deemed necessary on the facts and in the circumstances of the case.
FOR WHICH ACT OF KINDNESS, THE PETITIONER SHALL BE DUTY BOUND, EVER PRAY.
Dated : 20.04. 2018 …………………. FILED BY: NAGARAJA.M.R.
Place : Mysuru , India……………………. PETITIONER-IN-PERSON
Edited, printed , published owned by NAGARAJA.M.R. @ # LIG-2 No 761, HUDCO FIRST STAGE , OPP WATER WORKS , LAXMIKANTANAGAR , HEBBAL ,MYSURU – 570017 KARNATAKA INDIA Cell : 91 8970318202
WhatsApp 91 8970318202
Home page :
Contact : editor@dalitonline.in
posted by DALIT online @ 3:34 AM
<< Home