Judge's Mafia & Loya Murder
DALIT ONLINE – e News Weekly
Spreading the light of humanity & freedom
Editor: Nagaraja.M.R.. Vol.14..Issue.07........18 / 02 / 2018
Editorial : Was Judge Loya Murdered by Judicial Mafia ?
- An appeal to H.E.Honourable President of India
The actions & Inactions of Government , Police & Supreme Court of India points towards MAFIA of Police – Criminals – Judges – Doctors murdering a honest judge and covering up the crime. Transparent investigation is the need of the hour. H.E. Honourable President of India Must order an enquiry into the whole crime.
Jai Hind. Vande Mataram.
Your’s
Nagaraja Mysuru Raghupathi.
Judge Loya death: Top forensic expert rules out heart attack as cause for demise
Dr RK Sharma went through the documents, accessed through an RTI, and said there was possible trauma to the brain and poisoning.
A top forensic expert in the country has dismissed the official claim that Special CBI Judge BH Loya died of a heart attack, Atul Dev of The Caravan reported.
Speaking to the publication after examining medical documents relating to Loya's death, Dr RK Sharma, former head of Forensic Medicine and Toxicology Department, AIIMS, and president of Indian Association of Medico-Legal Experts, also stated that the documents show signs of possible trauma to the brain, and that there is also a possibility of poisoning.
The Caravan obtained some of the documents through Right to Information applications, whereas others, which rule out suspicions regarding Loya's death, were submitted to the Supreme Court by the Maharashtra government.
"There is no evidence of myocardial infarction in the histopathology report. The findings in this report have no suggestion of a heart-attack. They show changes, but not a heart attack," Sharma said.
According to the post-mortem report, the probable cause of death was "coronary artery insufficiency". Countering it, Sharma said, "There are changes observed in heart in these documents, but none of them are conclusive enough to show 'Coronary Artery Insufficiency'. Every patient who goes for a bypass surgery will have these symptoms."
Sharma said that the documents also suggest that Loya could have suffered trauma to the brain. "More importantly, dura is congested according to the post-mortem report. Dura mater is the outermost layer that surrounds our brain. It is damaged in cases of trauma, which indicates some kind of an assault on the brain. A physical assault," he said.
Some of the members of Loya's family, including his father and two of his sisters, had earlier told the publication that they remember seeing bloodstains at the back of his shirt when saw his body.
However, the reason for why dura was congested was not written in the report, something that Sharma said he found strange. "There is a possibility of poisoning. Every single organ is congested," he said.
Sharma also said an investigation should be carried out into the matter. "The situation presented in these documents necessitates an investigation."
The Caravan report also points out several contradictions in the medical documents pertaining to Loya's death. Read the full report here.
It was in November last year that The Caravan published an investigative report pointing out several explosive details and raising unanswered questions pertaining to the death of judge Brijgopal Harkishan Loya in a suspicious manner in Nagpur in 2014.
Loya was at the time hearing a high-profile case relating to the alleged staged encounter of Sohrabuddin Sheikh in 2005. BJP national president Amit Shah, who was then the Gujarat Home Minister, was the prime accused in the case.
Less than a month after Loya's death, a CBI court discharged Shah from the case observing that the charges were politically motivated.
However, in January this year Loya's 21-year-old son Anuj at a press conference said that his family has no suspicions about his father’s death.
While several wondered if the statement had been made under duress, others were quick to point fingers saying that the death had been unnecessarily politicised.
Judge Loya’s Death: 13 Questions That Remain Unanswered
(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]
Loya’s Death Was Premeditated Murder, Says Late Judge’s Friend Uday Gaware
At a public meeting, Gaware said many of Loya’s friends, including judges, had had their suspicions when the CBI judge died of a sudden heart attack.
The story of Loya’s death has assumed greater proportions in light of the recent historic press conference by four Supreme Court judges. Credit: The Caravan
New Delhi: Justice BH Loya’s friend from law college, Uday Gaware, while speaking at a public meeting organised by the All India People’s Forum, an association of different civil society and political groups, stunned everyone when he said that the judge’s death was “premeditated murder”.
The meeting, held at at New Delhi’s Indian Social Institute, was called “Suspicious Death of Judge: Implications for Democracy”. It was addressed by Caravan Magazine’s Niranjan Takle, the journalist who broke the story, the magazine’s political editor Hartosh Singh Bal, former judge of the Bombay high court BG Kolse Patil, senior advocate Indira Jaising and Gaware, who is a member of Latur bar association.
Speaking in front of a packed house, the speakers demanded a probe and raised concerns over whether the executive was trying to influence the judiciary in any way.
The series of events
Loya, who in official records died in December 2014 because of a cardiac arrest, was presiding over the CBI court in the Sohrabuddin Sheikh fake encounter case in which BJP president Amit Shah was one of the accused. However, in November, 2017, Caravan broke a story that revealed that there were signs that multiple hospital documents related to his death may have been tampered. The family of Loya expressed its suspicion over various developments before and after his death.
It should be noted that Justice MB Gosavi, who replaced Loya in the CBI court, discharged Shah less than a month after the judge’s death. He found that Shah’s name had been dragged in the case for political reasons.
The much talked-about story on developments around Loya’s death has now assumed greater proportions in light of the historic press conference by the Supreme Court’s four senior-most puisne judges who accused the chief justice of India, Dipak Misra, of allocating work to judges “selectively to the benches “of their preference”, bypassing senior judges in the process. Justice Gogoi told journalists that the press conference was prompted by issues surrounding the death of special CBI judge Loya.
Questions galore
“I was working on a different story when Nupur Biyani, Loya’s niece, approached me in mid-2017. She gave me details of his death which, she said, made the family suspicious. I knew these are hearsay accounts,” Takle said.
“I asked her whether her mother, Anuradha Biyani, would come on record as only she could give a first-hand account. When her mother agreed, I started working on it. I could understand that the family was quite frightened. I met Anuj, Loya’s son; he was completely silent and scared. He did not answer any of my questions. His grandfather said he has lost in belief in everything. He doesn’t believe in law, police, media, and the system. His hopelessness triggered me to get into the story in detail,” Takle said.
“All the questions I raised in the story still remain. And now new questions have emerged for which we all will have to find answers. I wrote many stories against the corruption during the Congress government too. When I set out to uncover the details of Loya’s story, it wasn’t meant to be against the BJP. As a journalist, without any fear or favour, telling the truth is the most important thing,” he added.
According to Gaware, everyone in power did their best to suppress the story until Caravan published it.
Gaware said, “If the worshippers of the pen sleep, then worshippers of the nation will sell off the country. Loya was my friend. Both of us finished our law degrees together. All his judgements were impartial. He came from a very ordinary family. He embraced death but never sold his integrity.”
“The day Loya died, the same day, people, including many judges, started telling me that Loya has been cheated. The matter was so sensitive that no one dared to file a complaint. Now I feel, we should not have been so fearful. Loya’s death was a premeditated murder,” he said, adding that if the judicial system gets paralysed, then democracy cannot be sustained.
“Loya died on December 1. On December 15, MB Gosavi replaced him, and within 15 days, he read the 10,000-page CBI chargesheet and discharged the president of a party. This (Sohrabuddin encounter case) matter was going on from 2005, but the new judge understood the case within 15 days. That is surprising,” he adds.
‘Heart of the rot’
The Caravan’s political editor, Hartosh Bal, said that exactly like the Radia tapes “dealt with the heart of the rot in the previous UPA regime” , the Loya story deals with the heart of the rot of the current regime. He said that corruption during the UPA regime involved three of the four pillars of our democracy – political class, executive and media, communal hatred and violence during the NDA regime involves all the four pillars, including the judiciary.
“To come to the Sohrabuddin trial, you have to go through a series of links that connects directly to the 2002 anti-Muslim violence in Gujarat under the watch of Narendra Modi. The first step to this was the murder of the state’s home minister Hiren Pandya and that happened because he was privy to certain details about how the administration acted during the 2002 violence. Questions over his death still remain unanswered. Questions related to his death led to the murder of Sohrabuddin and Tulsiram Prajapati. And it is in this context, the suspicious death of judge Loya becomes so important because if the judiciary cannot be seen as delivering justice in this case, then the very core of democracy is under question.”
“A judge dies under circumstances which are at best questionable without a clear answer or without a probe being set up is just unacceptable. A judge who dies hearing a case in which the BJP president Amit Shah was an accused is even more unacceptable… After watching the press conference by senior SC judges, the first person who should step forward to go to the SC and say that there should be an impartial probe should be Amit Shah.”
Former high court judge Patil said, “An environment of fear in our country exists today. And this has been deliberately manufactured. Judge Loya’s death gives a message to the other judges that either accept Rs 100 crore or die. This case can open a Pandora’s box but people in power do not want that. I want to say that if a judge of such a sensitive case dies in suspicious circumstances, why should a probe not happen. Why is it so difficult for the government to get a probe done? What restricts it to initiate a probe on its own?”
Judicial independence
Senior advocate Indira Jaising raised a central question. “Is the executive interfering with the functioning of the judiciary? I have only this question to ask. If the government interferes in its functioning, then judiciary will collapse from within.”
“I had represented the CBI in the Sohrabuddin’s encounter case. Not a single accused person could get even bail at that time. I did my duty. Today, I am told that I am an UPA agent. I reject that allegation,” she said.
She then stressed on the importance of an independent judiciary. “The four (SC) judges have done us a big favour by coming out in front of the press, recognising our right to know. It is a huge step on their part to make the judicial functioning transparent. I condemn those who are condemning the judges because they have vested interests. Who will protect the independence of judiciary. The lawyers and bar associations must stand up to protect it. It is not the government which can protect it as all governments want a loyal judiciary.”
She added that the the SC should have taken a suo motu notice of the case immediately after suspicious details about Loya’s death emerged. She alleged that SC’s Justice Arun Mishra, who has been allotted the case by the chief justice of India, should not be presiding over the case as he had a history of giving favourable judgements for the state of Gujarat, where the BJP has been power for more than 20 years.
She also invoked the medical college bribery scam to point out corrupt practices in higher judiciary and added that the civil society should come together to protect its independence and impartial nature.
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
Home page :
Contact : editor@dalitonline.in
posted by DALIT online @ 3:24 AM
<< Home