259
THE
EQUALLY ENFORCED LAWS
The last mail was submitted to His Excellency the President
of India, Chief Justice of India,
Indian Army, Indian Air Force and Chief Vigilance Commissioner (CVC) on 2 May
2014. Later, it was posted in the blog
www. howeverythinghappenedinindia.blogspot.com
SP leader Mr. Mulayam Singh Yadav, on 2 May 2014, described Prime Minister Manmohan Singh as a coward.
A definition for the word “coward” was
given in Chapter-256.
The militant people, on 2 May 2014,
killed 31 people in the Assam State.
The Supreme Court of India is responsible for
this.
A Supreme Court Bench comprising Justice A.K Patnaik and FMI Kalifulla, on 5 May 2014, said that
the Election Commission of India (ECI)
could disqualify any candidate if he indulges in paid news.
There is no use in explaining the
reason why the judgement plays a complementary role to impair the reasoning
power of the people.
The CBI judge, O.P. Saini, recorded the statement of former Telecom Minister Mr. A Raja on 5 May 2015.
Mr.
A. Raja
gave written answers to 1718 questions. Among other things, he told the court
that:
1. The CBI investigated the case in a
predetermined manner.
2. The CBI fabricated the oral
evidence.
3. The Supreme Court did not give an
opportunity to hear him.
4. The CBI was ignorant of the government
functioning.
5. The old operators prevented new
competition; and he opposed it.
6. He acted on the proposal of the
Department of Telecommunication.
7. He acted in accordance with the law.
8. He acted after discussion with the
Solicitor General, Union Cabinet and the Prime Minister of India.
The judge proudly described the
recording as the direct conversation between him and the accused. But he did not
ask Mr. Raja or the CBI to produce the law passed by the Parliament or the
resolution passed by the Union Cabinet to throw away the spectrum.
This happens because the Supreme
Court damages not only the judgement of the people but also that of the judges.
Therefore, it must make public the
relevant laws, if any, even if they had been passed in the interest of the
stronger.
A five judge Constitution Bench of the Supreme
Court of India comprising Chief Justice R. M. Lodha and Justices
A. K. Patnaik, S. J. Mukhopadhaya, Dipak Misra and F M I Kalifulla ordered that the CBI could prosecute any corrupt
public servants without the prior sanction from the Union Government.
It described the corrupt public
servants as corrupters of public power. It, further, declared that the
classification made in section 6-A - on the basis of status in government service
- was against Article 14 that talks of equality before law.
The Supreme Court of India has waited
for over 60 years to recognize this. It opened its eyes only after 258 letters,
particularly the last two letters.
The judgement makes the learned judges
affable and human.
It shows that the grip of “the elite
group” is slipping.
If it is implemented, the officers will
have the fear of law.
They might cite the resolution of the
Union Cabinet or the law passed by the Parliament to wriggle out from the
corrupting forces.
The judgement has a few other
ramifications.
For instance: 1. Friends and relatives
of all ministers will come under the Money
Laundering Act. Thus the system cannot be selective in ill treating former
Union Minister Mr. A. Raja.
2. Mining licences had been granted
without any promulgated law. Therefore, all mining licences will be cancelled.
The mining activity will be a business of the Public Sector Undertakings (PSUs).
3. Many PSUs had been privatized in violation of the guidelines passed by
the Union Cabinet. Therefore, they will be restored.
4. There will be no raids on any
licensed entity before implementing the suggestion of the present man.
5. No judge of the Supreme Court-
retired after 2002- would be asked to do any secret duty to the nation.
6. The present election will be
declared null and void. The election will be conducted after giving freedom.
However, so long as there is total
lawlessness, the judgement will end up as a mere show.
By the by, the learned judges of the
Supreme Court also must have the fear of law.
Now they impair the reason because they
get more than what the people fighting for freedom get.
A Supreme Court Bench – dismissed a
petition of chief of the Sahara Company,
Mr. Subrata Roy, against the order of
the Supreme Court that jailed him. Now he is in jail.
The depositors want money rather than
the act of sending the entrepreneurs to jail.
When the Supreme Court takes action
against one entity, it must affect all other similar entities like the SUS bank
mentioned in this work.
Further, the Supreme Court must take a stand
to deal with fictitious accounts.
Therefore, it must consider the suggestions
of the present man in the proper perspective and implement them.
Special CBI judge Madhu Jain, on 7 May 2014, summoned Mr.
Darda, an MP, in the so-called coal case. His son, Mr.Devendra Darda, and Mr.
Manoj Jayaswal, Director, AMR Iron
and Steel Pvt. Ltd, were also summoned. The charge was that they
fraudulently acquired coal blocks.
Here also, the Supreme Court must publish
the promulgated laws, if any, or the resolution passed by the Union Cabinet
with date to grant mining licences.
A Supreme Court Bench headed by Justice T.S. Thakur, on 9 May 2014,
ordered a CBI enquiry into the Chit Fund Scandals in the West Bengal state.
This work shows that the CBI is an evil
institution. It has not even sufficient man power. Yet the court chooses it for
important investigations!
It must be noted that the present man
gave a suggestion to avert such scandals. But the court ignored it.
This is letter No.259.
The Chief of the Indian Army also must
fight for the ideals present in the Constitution of India.
The facts from 2 May 2014 to 9 May 2014 are being submitted to His Excellency the
President of India, Chief Justice of India, chiefs of the Indian Army and the
Indian Air Force, some High Courts and Chief Vigilance Commissioner (CVC) on 10 May 2014.
V.
Sabarimuthu
26-3 Thattamkonam, Vellicode, Mulagumoodu PIN:
629167
Tamil Nadu State, INDIA
10 May 2014
No comments:
Post a Comment