Common Law

Whereas Contempt Petition was filed by Senior Counsel Harish Salve against his professional brother Senior Counsel Prashant Bhushan, in the Supreme Court, for his alleged contemptuous article against Supreme Court Judges in Tehelka Publication, as I see the Petition is misconceived, inasmuch as, the alleged contemptuous article though originating from Prashant Bhushan, but it is the Editors of Tehelka who took a final call and decided to publish that alleged contemptuous article. (Emphasis added) It is the act of publication of that alleged contemptuous article which is imagined as prejudiced the minds of people towards dignity of apex court of the country. Had Tehelka Editors would have decided otherwise, no contempt can be made out against Prashant Bhushan notwithstanding the alleged article yet in being. (Emphasis added) However, Prashant Bhushan could have been alleged of contempt had the medium of publication to the people at large were also to originate from Prashant Bhush...

It is the same as JUDGES while themselves protected with tough woodland shoes & then with great enthusiasm VENTURE to adjudicate rights of humanity, in continuous deprivation, suffering BAREFOOT on path scattered with broken glasses. As long as judges, AT LEAST, imagine removing their tough shoes and imagine exposing themselves to the hazard of walking barefoot on path of broken glasses, they can hardly imagine the pain, then is felt when the particle of broken glass penetrate to the legroom and the consequent red fluid slowly come from there. Therefore, when the pain of this suffering humanity is not properly imagined, Judges think that they are at liberty to arrive that NO rights of theirs are violated. Status quo can be maintained. Moreover, sometime I wonder, when all the cases of suffering humanity are filed in representative capacity i.e. in the form of PILs, wherein the actual victim is not present arguing before the court for his fundamental & Statutory dues, th...

A section of media has published this. In his strongest statement ever, Union Home Minister P Chidambaram has warned Pakistan of retaliation in case of another Mumbai-like terror attack. He was addressing a gathering in Madurai.November 1, 2009 Senior BSF Officer killed in blast near Jammu. DIG O.P.Tanwar of the Border Security Officer was killed while two other personnel were injured in a blast triggered by militants near the Indo Pak border. Hindutan times- November 17, 2009 "However the blast was not like mumbai terror attack. So no retaliation required", I call it the Voice of Silence. ============================================================== Legal issues !! If you are facing any of these issues like (a) Recovery of Moneys (b) Immovable property disputes (c) grievances against Municipalities & Govts., including challenge to legitimacy of laws etc. (d) grievances against illegalities and highhandedness of Police like illegal arrests, refusal to regist...

DAMAGES IN WRIT PROCEEDINGS This blog originated in the felt need for a EFFICIENT remedy that may be available to Citizens who are victims of gross misuse of powers and negligent acts and omissions of public authorities / public officials / police, resulting in loss of life or of property or of liberty of an individual. Do Citizens who are victim of irresponsible & reckless misbehavior of Police or of other Public officials, has any effective remedy against these government people ? ? ? The answer is astounding yes by Apex Court in good number of cases that came before it. When the constitutional and legal rights of a person are invaded with a mischievous or malicious infant, the court has jurisdiction to compensate the victim, by awarding suitable monetary compensation. Bhim Singh versus State of J & K, AIR 1986 SC 494. Apex court has used the Writ Jurisdiction to award compensation to victims of State wrongful acts. Usually a victim has to start from the lower court...

Whereas manu sharma was found guilty of murdering model Jessica Lall and sentenced Life imprisonment; And whereas he was granted Parole as per the law; And whereas The Probation of offenders Act 1958 governs ‘Parole’; And whereas section 3 & 4 govern who can be granted Parole; Section 3 empowers court to release certain offenders after admonition (authoritative strict warning)- section says- where any person found guilty of offence of theft or offence of misappropriation of property, or any offence punishable for imprisonment upto two years….. may be granted Section 4 empowers court to release certain offenders of good conduct. The section begins with the categorical and unambiguous declaration that Parole cannot be considered for any person who is found guilty of having committed an offence punishable with death or imprisonment for life…. And whereas manu sharma was found guilty of murdering model Jessica Lall and sentenced Life imprisonment. There is a Supreme Co...

08.11.2009 Whereas a Patient dies after PM security blocks his way to Emergency; http://www.hindustantimes.com/chandigarh/Patient-dies-after-PM-s-security-stops-him-PMO-orders-probe/472635/H1-Article1-472207.aspx I wish to say that Nations enforce UNCONSENTED supreme sacrifices on some of its Citizenry so that it can bring to the front ISSUES which have plagued it. However the death caused for the patient was ‘jammed’ by PM Security personnel, the result will be the same if the same patient was caught in ugly traffic jams of urban jungle. What we should be asking now: 1) Rational Security arrangement of VIPs that does not interfere with daily traffic; 2) No permission should be given for mass Rallies on roads; 3) The municipalities before declaring a road closed for repairs should ensure that the diversion of traffic on other road doesn’t create traffic jams. To whom should we ask? To one of the rightful owner of the problem !! The Courts. The High Court and th...

Date: 03.11.2009 From: Sandeep Jalan, To: Shri K G Balakrishnan, the CJI, Shri Veerappa Moily, the Minister of Law & Justice Whereas Justice Dinakaran is accused of land grabbing with documentary evidences.... And whereas according to one SC Judgment no FIR can be registered against any Judge.... And yet FIR can be registered against Mr Dinakaran [not against Justice Dinakaran], for the offence of land grabbing was committed in an individual capacity..... And whereas the bar to register any FIR against any Judge is on the premise where any Judge has been accused of corruption in the due discharge of his duty as a Judge..... This is exactly what the SC has said in one ruling where no sanction is required to prosecute a public servant accused of amassing wealth disproportionate to his income, for amassing wealth is not an act which can be said “in the due discharge of his duty”.... Act of criminality is outcome of an individual thought process. Man accused of or ...