human rights

Rajiv Gandhi Assassination Cover-up

S.O.S   e – Voice For Justice – e-news weekly
Spreading the light of humanity & freedom

Editor: Nagaraja.M.R.. Vol.09..Issue.09….….29/02/2014

 

 

 

 

Rajiv Assassination Master Minds  scot free ? Only tools of assassination convicted

Rajiv  Gandhi  Assassination Cover-up

https://sites.google.com/site/sosevoiceforjustice/rajiv-gandhi-assassination-coverup 

 

Editorial :  PIL –  DEATH PENALTY RIGHT OR WRONG ?  ABLOLISH DEATH PENALTY


–        AN APPEAL TO H.E.Honourable PRESIDENT OF INDIA  &  HONOURABLE SUPREME COURT  OF INDIA  

 

WHY DO WE KILL PEOPLE WHO KILL PEOPLE TO TELL PEOPLE THAT KILLING  PEOPLE IS BAD ???

 Just consider the following facts persons convicted in rarest of  rare cases that of Assassinating a former prime minister of india  are commuted to life sentence & within hours  released by state government of  Tamil Nadu. Where as some convicts convicted in heinous crimes but not heinous or rarest of rare  like PM Rajiv Gandhi assassination were  hanged without alternatives like commuting  their sentances to life term.

 

Poor , tribal people in chattisgarh , Andhra Pradesh , Jharkhand & other states infested with terrorism / naxalism  (even without any material incriminating evidences) are charged with charges like giving food , cloth & medical aid to terrorists / naxalites,  therby  waging war against the nation . Those poor tribals rae put behind bars and tried under draconian laws like TADA , POTA , MOCA , etc. Where as movie star Sanjay Dutt who knowing fully well the intentions kept deadly arms in his house . Arms were given to him by master minds of Mumbai attacks. Initially he was booked under TADA , then TADA charges were dropped and awarded a lesser prison term than actually deserved. Further , he is getting paroles week after  week which other ordinary prisoners are unable to get even once.

 

Consider the case of Bhopal Gas Tragedy , the company & top most officials were well aware of safety procedural lapses in the Bhopal plant , still continued the operations. When the accident happened slaughtering thousands & maiming lakhs of people , the government first charged the  head of the company with charges of man slaughter. Afterwards , he was arrested but stealthily facilitated to escape to his home country literally flown out by the police , chief minister of the government. Subsequently chief Justice of India dropped man slaughter charges against him & filed lenient charges against him making the way for lenient punishment in future (JUDGEMENT FIXING).  CJI benefitted from it ? Paradoxically after retirement , CJI became  head of the trust controlling crores of rupees  monitoring the rehabilitation of Bhopal gas victims.

 

In this context it is quite pertinent to note that In India with money power , right political connections any crime can be done & be scot free . In India  Legal system is for Sale , Judicial orders can be manipulated. The convict in a case may be an innocent  without recourse to right connections  & legal aid. So , one cann’t be 100% sure whether the death convict has actually committed the crime.

 

A criminal is not born, but made by social circumstances. For the crime
scenario in India , every citizen of India is indirectly responsible.
Our present inefficient, corrupt legal system , is wholly dependent on
evidences which a rich criminal can create or destroy at his sweet
will. Police forcibly take confessions from the accussed , by applying
3rd degree torture methods. Some of the judges are literally auctioning
” judicial orders” for bribe. Due to all these reasons one cann’t be
100% sure about one criminal’s conviction. In such cases, capital
punishment will be unfair & inhuman. It must be made mandatory, in all
death penalty cases that polygraph, lie detector tests, etc must be
conducted on ” death convicts ” , to know whether they are innocent or
guilty inspite of hostile evidences. Fundamentally, the capital
punishment has failed
as a deterrent.

The people who clamour for continuance of death penalty are BIASED,
INHUMAN, BUTCHERS & CANIBALS. Why don’t they ask for death penalty to
policemen, who murder people through 3rd degree  torture, in lock-ups &
fake encounters ? why don’t they ask for death penalty to corrupt
judges who sells judicial orders for bribe ? why don’t they ask for
death penalty to builders who cause building collapses, resulting in
mass murders ? why don’t they ask for death
penalty to corrupt government doctors who refuses to treat poor patient
without bribe, causing the murder of poor patient ? why don’t they ask
for death penalty to industrialist/ traders who sell adulterated food
items, spurious drugs/ medicines, in turn causing mass murders ? why
don’t they ask for death penalty to corrupt government officials , who
help criminals, industrialists? Why don’t they ask for death penalty to
politicians who create communal & other riots, who have ties with
foreign intelligence agencies, terrorist outfits ? Why don’t they ask
for death penalty to mole in the P.M.O & the senior officers of
National Security Council who passed on national secrets ? Why don’t
they ask for death penalty to public servants , ministers who gave aid
, support to terrorist outfits like L.T.T.E out of government of india
coffers , killing hundreds of srilankans , tamils ?

These are the guilty persons , criminals  who don’t personally ,
directly murder human beings but cunningly murder hundreds which go
unnoticed by any. For the person who barbarically murders one human
being you prescribe CAPITAL PUNISHMENT but for those who murder
hundreds you say nothing why ? THEY WON’T ASK FOR IT, BECAUSE MOST OF
THE PERSONS WHO ARE DEMANDING DEATH PENALTY ARE BIASED, SELFISH &
BELONG TO ONE OF THE SECTIONS OF CRIMINALS MENTIONED ABOVE. They lack
objectivity.

Death penalty is the ultimate . cruel , inhuman and degrading
punishment. It violates the right to life Article 1 of universal
declaration of human rights. It is irrevocable , prone to judicial
errors and can be inflicted on innocents. It has never been shown to
deter crime more effectively than other punishments. In most of the
countries including india , judicial system is ineffective ,
inefficient to prosecute impartially both poor & rich criminals. Those
condemned to death penalty mostly come from poor background who are
unable to afford wise & articulate Advocates who can efficiently argue
their case. Against these poor accussed , the criminal nexus of
police-criminal-bureaucrat builds up fake evidences , extracts forced
confessions by 3rd degree torture. Most of death convicts world over
belongs to either poor , TRIBALS , DALITS , etnic minorities ,
political dissidents , children , mentally ill. No rich & mighty
criminal is ever prosecuted let alone hanged.

The judicial system which depends on technical facts like evidences
lacks sense to figure out truth out of fake evidences , also as judges
are human beings they are prone to err. Add to this corruption in
judiciary. Death penalty is irreversible & irrevocable. In a mature
democracy like U.S.A with relatively efficient judicial system itself
hundreds of cases of death convicts were found to be wrong , convicts
were found to be innocents upon review & were let free. Where as in
india , the accussed lacks the wherewithal to argue his case in the
first place then how can he arrange for case review ? no judge is god ,
if a hanged person is found to be innocent the judge doesn’t has the
ability to bring back the hanged person to life , do such judges have
right to snatch away lives ?

Hereby HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH’S Urges H.E . PRESIDENT OF INDIA  & HONOURABLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA ,

1.        to stay all death penalties until equitable criminal justice system
with respect to above mentioned rich & mighty criminals is put into
force .


2.        until death penalty is abolished, to make poly graph, lie detector
tests mandatory for all death convicts in a free & fair manner by a
neutral authority , to ascertain whether the convict is really guilty
or innocent of the alleged crime .

3.        until death penalty is abolished , to give a peaceful choice of
death to the death convicts like sleeping pill, injection, gun shot,
etc instead of medieval & barbaric ” death by hanging”.

4.     finally, to abolish death penalty from statuette books.

JAI HIND. VANDE MATARAM.

Your’s sincerely,

Nagaraj.M.R.

 

 

Is CHIEF JUSTICE OF INDIA above LAW ???

https://sites.google.com/site/sosevoiceforjustice/chief-justice-above-law  ,

 

Law student sexually harassed by ex-Supreme Court judge:  case is not unique, but speaking out is nearly impossible

 

http://www.legallyindia.com/201311114099/Interviews/sexual-harassment-supreme-court-is-common  ,

 

Release Irom Sharmila

 

 

 

 

 

‘Role of Vaiko, Karunanidhi in Rajiv assassination not probed’

The chief investigating officer of the Rajiv Gandhi assassination case, K Ragothaman, has alleged that the then DMK leader Vaiko, as a prosecution witness, turned hostile and escaped the charge for perjury at the behest of the former SIT chief D R Karthikeyan.
In his book ‘Conspiracy to kill Rajiv Gandhi – from CBI files’, Ragothaman said that during the investigation more than 500 video cassettes were seized, including a cassette titled ‘In tigers cave’ revealing Vaiko’s clandestine visit to the LTTE area in Jaffna.
“He was speaking vulgarly about Rajiv Gandhi and spitting venom on Rajiv. It is also found that he met Pottu Amman when he was introduced to him by Prabhakaran. Vaiko was not questioned on this. Also, he was made witness to speak about his conversation with Prabhakaran while he was kept in the Ashoka Hotel, prior to signing of Indo-Sri Lanka accord,” Ragothaman wrote.
During the trial, Vaiko refused to admit voice on a video clip of a meeting secured by investigators, in which, he is heard saying that he told Prabhakaran over the intercom in Ashoka Hotel that ‘Rajiv Gandhi stabbed him in the back and the proposed accord was not the solution for achieving Tamil Eelam.’ Soon after the meeting between Prabhakaran and Rajiv Gandhi, on the Indo-Sri Lanka accord, Vaiko had a talk with Prabhakaran on intercom.
Ragothaman has also dragged DMK patriarch Karunanidhi, who abruptly cancelled his meeting at Sriperumbudur on May 21, 1991, to the centre of controversy. Ragothaman wrote, “When I had collected the evidence about the cancellation of the meeting and brought to the notice of the chief of SIT to question the DMK leader on that issue, I was told that part of investigation was done by him and that DGP Rangasamy had requested the DMK leader to cancel the meeting. Also, I was chided by SIT chief asking me not to create such issues as I had done in Rasheed Murder case.”
Speaking to the ‘Express’, Ragothaman said that he opposed Vaiko as witness and told SIT chief that he appears to be a suspect.
“SIT chief Karthikeyan told me there was not sufficient evidence against Vaiko. Also, starting point of our investigation should have been cancellation of Karunanidhi’s trip to Sriperumbudur, but Karthikeyan did not allow probe into it,” Ragothaman said.
Karthikeyan, hailed as one of the most relentless investigators, vehemently refuted the charges authored by his own team member.
“He is flogging the dead horse. No way can anybody question the integrity of an investigation and nothing remains to be done. All the aspects were explored by the 40-member team 20 years ago and SIT had received words of appreciation from two judicial commissions on record. The Supreme Court placed on record appreciation for my leadership,” Karthikeyan told Express.

SDPI demands re-opening of probe into Rajiv Gandhi’s assassination case


Bhopal: The Social Democratic Party of India, (SDPI), has demanded the re-opening of the probe into former Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi’s assassination case after 21 years following a sensational disclosure that a crucial video of the assassination was suppressed by the then IB (Intelligence Bureau) Chief and now West Bengal Governor M. K. Narayanan.
SDPI national president Mr. E. Abubacker in a statement said that the allegation is serious. “If there such a video as claimed by the investigating officer, then it warrants another probe. The matter should be looked into,” said, Mr. Abubacker.
Mr. Abubacker said that it is learnt that when news-hounds tracked Mr. Narayanan, who is now in Melbourne on a visit, reportedly avoided direct question but at the same time there was no denial. Narayanan claims all evidence is already present with the investigating agency.
The statement stated that the chief investigating officer of the Rajiv Gandhi assassination case, K. Ragothaman in his just-published book, “Conspiracy to kill Rajiv Gandhi – From CBI files”, has claimed that the tape, which had been taken from the videographer by IB the day after Rajiv Gandhi had been blown by Dhanu on May 21, 1991, was never shared with the Special Investigation Team, (SIT), in the investigation of the assassination. In the book Ragothaman said that although a “preliminary enquiry” had been conducted in connection with the missing video, Narayanan had been “allowed to go scot-free” by the SIT chief D. R. Karthikeyan.
Similarly, the statement said that Adv. S. Doraisamy, who pleaded for Nalini, one of those convicted in the Rajiv Gandhi assassination case, has written a book, claiming to unravel the mysteries and nail the bungling by the SIT chief Karthikeyan. The soon-to-be published book, tentatively titled “Mysteries and Secrets Behind the Rajiv Gandhi Murder”, alleges a larger conspiracy.
SDPI chief wondered that a nation’s leader is assassinated and even that has to be suppressed. “So much for freedom of speech and expression and national security. Dig deeper, you will get to know beyond LTTE in Rajiv’s assassination. There are too many loop holes, convenient decisions taken in finishing Rajiv’s case in order to frame LTTE and put a full stop. Many facts were not properly investigated. Many issues were suppressed, as the book says, by Narayanan and Karthikeyan. Rajiv Gandhi was killed not only by the Lankan Tamils but also allegedly by some Congressmen,” he added.
He pointed out that the alleged manipulation, according to Ragothaman, was meant to erase video evidence of the kind of people Dhanu had interacted with at the venue, thereby sparing embarrassment to the Congress party in the middle of the 1991 Lok Sabha elections. The author asked: Would Narayanan have dared “to damage the goal of the Congress party, irrespective of his personal affiliation to Rajiv Gandhi’s family?” As such Narayanan’s connections are of doubtful nature and can be probed into to unravel the truth.
He said that Adv. Doraisamy, who reportedly in an interview remarked: “I have the evidence to prove that Rajiv Gandhi murder was an inside job. But the SIT headed by then Inspector General of Police Karthikeyan never pushed the investigation in the right direction”, requires a serious attention and should not be wished away.
Mr. Abubacker said that in view of the revelations made in the two books the unpleasant facts should not be swept under the carpet but thoroughly investigated to unmask the real conspirators and the culprits so that the people at large know the faces who eliminated the former Prime Minister for their vested interests.
Following the assassination of Rajiv Gandhi mysterious forces like P. V. Narsimha Rao took the top slot of Indian administration. Since Rao’s era India’s cooperation with Israel has increased manifolds at the cost of struggling Palestinian’s woes. The influence of the United States of America also increased on the Indian administration, he added.

Rajiv Assasination – Unanswered questions

Rajiv Gandhi assasination – leaves many unanswered questions – Unsolved puzzles. For whom did Rajiv Gandhi got assisinated ? Sudhangan raised various questions which didn’t get answers till 2009. Here are those questions that are unanswered:
1) On 21 -May-1991 Rajiv gandhi started from Delhi for election campaign and reached Chennai through the route Orissa and Andra Pradesh. How did he accepted that midnight meeting at Sriperambuthur which was not in the agenda of TamilNadu Congress committe. ?
2) Is there any plan made somewhere to bring Rajiv Gandhi to Sriperambathur some how ?
3) The Security official Mr O.P.Sagar was there with Rajiv Gandhi when he campaigned at Bhubaneshwar and Vishakapattinam. But he didnt come to chennai along with Rajiv. Why ?
4) Bulgarian television journalists came along with Rajiv during his visits to record his campaigns. They were with Rajiv in Orissa and Andha Predesh but didnt come for the next meeting. They stayed in a luxary hotel at Vishakapatinam along with their special flight pilot. In that case why did they came ?
5) When Rajiv was about to start, there was a problem in the flight. So he went back to circuit house from the airport. After the problem in flight got fixed, the chief minister of Andha Pradesh Mr.VijayaBhaskar Reddy informed Rajiv to get back to airport and Rajiv went to airport. During this time the two Bulgerian journalists took the security official Sagar along in their car and arrived at airport late. So the security official could not go along with Rajiv gandhi. Why did such an experienced security official was made not to travel with Rajiv ?
6) The security official of Rajiv at chennai P.C.Gupta was waiting at chennai airport for Rajiv. P.C.Gupts is suppose to get the gun from Sagar who was expected along with Rajiv. Since Sagar has not come along with Rajiv, P.C.Gupta was made to go with Rajiv without gun. Is there any intenton behind this ?
7) When Rajiv started from Meenambakkam, two ladies claiming as journalists got inside his car at Ramavaram. Did their identities verified ? Why did the special investigation branch didnt enquire on them ?
8) Who are the Bulgarian journalists ? Where did they went ?
9) Who are those two lady journalists ? Where did they went ?
10) Those two lady journalists interviewed Rajiv Gandhi. But TamilNadu political party people, Tha. Pandiyan and Maragatham Chandrasekar were telling they didnt know what Rajiv spoke with the journalists. What are the hiding ?
11) Just one hour before his murder, Rajiv told it was CIA that killed the pakistan president Zia-ul-Haq. Why shoud he tell that ? What made him to tell that ? Did he know if there is some plan like that against him ?
12) July-1991 – The central home minister S.P.Chawan made a statement that apart from LTTE there are other international organizations and powerful external forces involved in the background of Rajiv’s murder. Who are they referred here ?
13) Why didn’t the special investination branch enquire on the above home minister’s statement ?
14) During the gulf war India helped fueling US aircrafts. Rajiv gandhi seriously condemmed this help which was done by primie minister Mr Chandrasekar during that time. Why didnt the special investigation branch enquire on CIA’s hands on this murder, as US was not happy with Rajiv for the above reason ?
15) Palestinian National Authority president, Mr. Yasser Arafat informed to the indian prime minister during the time Mr .Chandrasekar that ‘Rajiv Gandhi’s life is under threat’. From where did Arafat got this information ? Who is threatening Rajiv ? Why did special investigation branch didnt enquire on this ?
16) Arafat could have got this information if the assasination was planned at western Europe or middle eastern countries. Why is this not probed ?
17) Maragatham Chandrasekar came to attend that meeting with Rajiv Gandhi. Her daughter, Latha Priyakumar came with her husband and advocate Mahendran from Arakonam. But it was unknown from where did her son Lalith Chandrasekar and his wife Vinothini came from. Though it is known that Vinothini is daughter of Jayavarthane from Sri Lanka, they didn’t enquire on her. Infact they didnt enquire their family who was there at the meeting. why ?
18) Sivarasan’s mother and Vinothini’s father are sinhalas from Sri Lanka who were present at the incident. It is possible that they were sent by Sri Lankan president Premadasa as messangers. Premadasa is not happy with Rajiv on sending the Indian peace keeping force (IPKF) to Sri Lanka. Why was the investigation not done in that angle ? ( Also we should note here a Sinhala Sri Lankan army person hit Rajiv Gandhi with a gun during his visit to Sri Lanka )
19) Both LTTE and Sri Lanka hate Rajiv gandhi as he is the reaon for sending Indian peace keeping force (IPKF) to Sri Lanka. Advocate Mr Chandrasekar challenged special investigation branch that, if they could prove Vinothini and her family are innocent then those who did the crime will accept it on their own. But the special investination didnt accept his challence and not enquired those who is related on this. why ?
20) Kamini Disanayaka, Athulath Muthali, Wickramasinghe are prominant politicians in Sri Lanka. When all those people are murdered president Premadasa was pointed. Why did’t the investigation didnt happen in this angle ?
21) Why dont Sivarasan, Dhanu and Subha did this murder due to pressure from external forces. Just because they are Tamils from yarlpanam, did the investigators linked them with LTTE and closed the case ?
22) What is the strong evidence that links LTTE and its head Prabhakaran to Rajiv’s assasination case. ?
23) What is the proof that Srivarasan spoke to Prabhakaran thro a radio. Why is this not an assumption ?
24) It is very much possible that politicians within the congress could have considered Rajiv Gandhi is blocking their development within the party and could have hired some group to assasinate Rajiv. This motivation cannot be denied.
25) Various international business people specifically those selling weapons would have been in contact with Rajiv as a prime minister. They could have hired the assasinators to do this murder. Did investigators probed this ?
26) What if Sri Lanka did this, thinking India might send the Indian peace keeping force again to their country and didnt like a strong leader emerging from India ?
27) CIA always had interest in erradicating leaders in all third world countries. Did the same kind of interest got applied on Rajiv ?
28) Rajiv Gandhi is the only leader who prevents the other prominant political party in India BJP to get into power. It is possible that the indian parties like BJP and RSS could have used the ‘Hindu favourable’ LTTE and Sri Lankan tamils to do this assasination.
29) When other major Congress party members in Tamilnadu like Vazhapaadi and Moopanar didnt take interest in getting Rajiv to this meeting, Maragatham Chandrasekar traveled to Delhi and forced Rajiv to come for this meeting at Sriperambuthur. Is that without her knowledge she become one reason for Rajiv’s murder ?
30 ) Who is Pottu Amaan ? Is there a person like that ? LTTE says there was a senior person by name Amaan who died war and the only person there is Pottu. How did the special investigation branch stamped someone who is not alive as second criminal in this case ?
31) There are many parallels between the murder of Padmanabha and that of Rajiv Gandhi. Padmanabha’s murder was investigaed by TamilNadu queue branch police and Rajiv Gandhi’s murder was investigated by special investigation branch. Both the investigators are telling the murder was planned at Yarlpanam, Sri Lanka. Sivaraasan was identified as the prime criminal in both the Padmanabha’s case as well as Rajiv’ case. Prabhakaran was considered criminal in Rajiv’s assasination case bur was not in Padmanabha’s case. How come ? It shows adding Prabhakaran’s name came out of political decision rather than that came out from investigations. It is clearly an effort taken by special investigation branch to to give life to their case intentionally.
32) A famous Sri Lankan tamil poet Kasi. Anandan met Rajiv at the airport. What message did he got from Prabhakaran to Rajiv gandhi ? If Prabhakaran seeked Rajiv’s help in the freedom struggle of Tamil Eelam through Kasi Anandan, why would Prabhakaran murder Rajiv Gandhi ?
33) Prabhakaran knows it is from India and TamilNadu that he can get support and sympathy. Did Prabhakaran done such a foollish activity by killing Rajiv, to loose all the support of Indians and also get the organization banned ?
34) Latha Kannan stopped Rajiv and read a poetry for him. That enabled Dhanu, a suside bomber standing next to her, to burst the bomb. Why is her name is not included in the criminals list ? Dhanu used only Latha kannan to get inside. When HariBabu who got killed in the blast got included in the criminal’s list why not Latha Kannan ? Why is special investigation branch showing softness towards congress members ?
35) Before getting to SriPambuthur, Rajiv spoke at two roadside gatherings. Vazhapaadi Ramamurthy, the TamilNadu congress leader was with him in those two places. But at Sri Perambuthur meeting he was standing very far from Rajiv. Why so ?
36) Many innocent people and security personnels died along with Rajiv Gandhi. But nothing happened to any of the congress party members not even minor injury. How ?
37) It was believed that Latha Kumar who brought Sivarasan, Dhanu and Subha to SriPerambuthur. She took them specifically to ladies section and told Latha Kannan to take care of them. But Latha Kumar’s name is not in the criminal’s list. Why ?
38) How can we say Prabhakaran is involved just based on an old photograph of Sivarasan with Prabhakaran ?
39) Why is it not possible that Sivarasan, Dhanu and Subha are expelled from LTTE and they have been hired by western, European, Middle East or India as professional assasinators.
40) Ranganathan confessed that it was based on request by Margret Alva that he gave his house at Bangalore for rent to Sivarasan. Did they enquired how far this is true ?
41) Is there any investigation done on involvement of Chandra Swami, Subramanyam Swamy , Chandrasekar and arms business person Kasoki in this murder ?
42) What kind of benifit LTTE get by murdering Rajiv Gandhi ? Did super powers like US helped them by arms through CIA ?
43) Why do we need CBI & Special Investigation branch which find few people they prefer to get the reports ?
Unless all these confusions are clarified, the real culprit will be hiding behind some powerful forces.


Continue reading at NowPublic.com: Rajiv Assasination – Unanswered questions | NowPublic News Coverage 
http://www.nowpublic.com/world/rajiv-assasination-unanswered-questions#ixzz2Ayg9VI74  

People at the helm are protecting Rajiv murder accused’


Former Central Bureau of Investigation’s former chief investigating officer K Ragothaman has claimed in a recently published book — Conspiracy to kill Rajiv: From CBI files – that a lot of facts pertaining to the former prime minister’s assassination were either suppressed, or were studiously ignored.
Ragothamam writes that there were attempts made to protect the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam from being called the conspirators behind Rajiv’s killing. In this interview with rediff.com’s Vicky Nanjappa, Ragothaman speaks about the conspiracy and the hurdles that were faced in a probe in which many aspects were hushed up.
How has your book been received?
That is too early to tell. It is just out, but is under debate. Let us wait and watch.
You write that Dravida Munetra Kazhagam chief M Karunanidhi’s [ Images ] scheduled public meeting in Sriperumbudur on May 21, 1991, the day Rajiv was killed, was abruptly cancelled.
Karunanidhi was to address a meeting at 6′O clock that evening, two hours before Rajiv’s meeting. The police had made all arrangements. Then there was a telegram from the Anna Arivalyam postal office jurisdiction that the meeting was cancelled.
I probed the sender of that telegram. I was told to ask Karunanidhi about the same. However, I could not investigate him directly. Later, I was told by my superiors that the matter was being looked into, and I should remain quiet.
I was also told that it was a director general of police, Rangaswamy, who had advised that the meeting be cancelled. However, when I looked at the Rangaswamy affidavit, it read that he had ordered as much police force as possible in view of this meeting.
I also attended the Jain commission inquiry in which Karunanidhi was examined. He had said then that it was the then governor, Bhishma Narayan Singh, who had told him to cancel the meeting. Look at the contradictions.
Who according to you was the one who advised cancellation of the Karunanidhi meeting?
Probably it was Marumalarchi Dravida Munetra Kazhagam leader Vaiko who telephoned and sought cancellation of the meeting. The telephone records needed to be examined, but it was never done.
Why do you think Vaiko tried to stop Karunanidhi?
After Rajiv’s assassination, many DMK workers were attacked, their offices burnt. If Karunanidhi had gone there, he would have been in trouble and there would have been an onslaught. Hence, they were trying to protect him.
Does this mean even Karunanidhi was part of the plot?
No, that is not what I meant. Karunanidhi is not a killer. He wanted a democratic solution to the problem and this was never liked by slain LTTE [ Images ] chief Prabhakaran.
You accuse Vaiko of having a hand in this entire issue.
Vaiko was the one who spoke vehemently against the Indo-Jaffna accord. Vaiko said at that time he was first an LTTE, then a Tamilian and then an Indian. At the time of the accord, Prabhakaran was brought down to New Delhi [ Images ] and was put up at the Hotel Ashoka.
Vaiko sought to meet him, but he was not allowed to do so. He conversed with Prabhakaran on the intercom, during which the latter told him, “Anna, this Rajiv has betrayed me. I feel like committing suicide as he is sealing my fate. But I cannot kill myself as I need to fight for my people.”
Vaiko wrote a book later in which he mentions that Prabakaran had thought of committing suicide.
Tell us more, sir…
When Vaiko had gone to Sri Lanka [ Images ], we had secured a videotape titled Inside a Tiger’s Cave which has him on tape. There he spoke everything that was anti-Rajiv. It appeared that he was more against Rajiv than Prabakaran himself. This was also a point noted during our investigation.
Then there is also a meeting in which Vaiko says that Rajiv won’t go back alive from Tamil Nadu. He, however, retracted that statement. During the investigation, we questioned one Chinna who is on death row.
He said that in one of the hideouts, Sivarasan (the prime accused in the assassination) held talks with one Srinivas Ayya and said that after the successful completion of the mission, they should ensure that Vaiko becomes the chief minister of Tamil Nadu.
Why was the evidence not used then?
This is a question that I have been asking. We had so much evidence, but surprisingly Vaiko was roped in as prosecution witness number 250 in the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities court.
During the trial, he denied speaking all of which was on video with Prabhakaran. The video was played out. He claimed that it was him in the video but the voice was not his. It was sent for examination and the voice too was confirmed, but till date there is no perjury case against him.
You have alleged that even the Intelligence Bureau and the Research and Analysis Wing tried to cover up LTTE’s role?
After the assassination, Chandrashekhar, the then prime minister, convened a meeting in which even Janata Party president Subramanian Swamy (then minister of commerce and industry) was present. The then IB chief, MK Narayanan, and RAW boss, GS Bajpai, were also present.
Swamy said that it was obvious that the LTTE was responsible. Bajpai retorted that it was not the LTTE. The meeting was adjourned. Meanwhile, the CBI director had gone to Colombo for the investigation.
They were called back and rushed to Delhi for the meeting. During the meeting, it was again asked why a trip was made to Colombo and did that mean it was preconceived that it was the LTTE which was behind the assassination.
Bajpai once again opposed this. He even quoted one Kittu to be his source. Kittu, incidentally, was Prabhakaran’s right hand man. An LTTE man could never have been a RAW mole and even Dr Swamy had termed this as absurd.
What are your allegations against Narayanan?
A video taken at the meeting on that ill-fated day in which there were images of Dhanu was never made available to the CBI. The assassination team was waiting for nearly two hours in a sterile area. The original video reached Narayanan.
The government had decided to conduct an investigation in this regard and this case was registered with the Special Investigating Team and the CBI. However, it was buried. My question is, why no action has been taken for suppressing evidence.
It was being said that Dhanu had barged into the meeting, but this video clearly shows that they were waiting for a long time. We probed this case risking our own lives and it does upset me that people sitting at the helm of affairs are protecting the accused.
Do you think the loopholes will be rectified now?
Let us see.


Covering up Late PM Rajiv Gandhi Assassination conspiracy & BOFORS SCAM

The CBI & GOI is more interested in favoring accused persons , Quattrochi & closing BOFORS Case than punishing the guilty.
The GOI & investigating authorities have failed to punish the real master minds behind the Late Prime minister Shri . Rajiv Gandhi assassination case .
When a responsible Indian citizen volunteered to appear before the supreme court of india as an amicus curie , to give certain information before the court relating to this assassination , he was not at all permitted. Instead he was threatened , attempts made to murder him , his news paper was closed , his jobs were illegally snatched away , police & investigating agencies repeatedly grilled him , THE PURPOSE IS TO SILENCE THAT PERSON . The Police failed to act upon his complaints. The Supreme Court of India Failed to admit his PIL Petitions. ALL TO COVER UP THE POWERS THAT BE .
who are covering-up late p.m. rajiv gandhi assassination case? who are those conspirators? who are trying to silence me?
My sufferings began hand in hand with my crusade. I have raised various issues of social concern from time to time at the appropriate levels, one of those is LATE P.M. RAJIV GANDHI ASASSINATION CASE. where-in only the tools of the conspirator’s were punished where as the conspirators are roaming free. i have raised this topic of inequity , travesty of justice and sought a fair, proper enquiry& trial , at various forums. but to no avail.
the conspirators were disturbed by this and tried to silence me by threatening me, physically assaulting me and even made attempts to murder me. they prevented me from appearing before the JAIN COMMISSION OF ENQUIRY. they even manipulated the recruitment systems to deny me the appointments in R.B.I.CURRENCY NOTE PRESS MYSORE, P.E.S. COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING MANDYA, N.I.E MYSORE , District Court Mysore & Illegally snatched away my job in RPG Cables Ltd , Mysore . they even tried to silence me by forcibly closing down my newspaper publications THE TESTUDO & VOICE OF CRUSADER.
my appeals for justice resulted only in police enquiries. the central intelligence bureau(I.B.) state intelligence & state police personnel enquired me exhaustively number of times, but they never did enquire the powers that be. any way these people don’t have practical powers to enquire such people. the highest constitutional functionaries who can order a proper enquiry, trial are keeping mum inspite of repeated appeals. probably they are acting under the directions of conspirators. thereby they are not only covering up the crime, they are actively sponsoring terrorism , but are also violating my fundamental/human rights & obstructing me from performing my fundamental duties as a citizen of india.

 

 

Continue reading at NowPublic.com: Rajiv Assasination – Unanswered questions | NowPublic News Coverage http://www.nowpublic.com/world/rajiv-assasination-unanswered-questions#ixzz2Ayg9VI74

 

 

 

People at the helm are protecting Rajiv murder accused’

 

 

Former Central Bureau of Investigation’s former chief investigating officer K Ragothaman has claimed in a recently published book — Conspiracy to kill Rajiv: From CBI files – that a lot of facts pertaining to the former prime minister’s assassination were either suppressed, or were studiously ignored.

http://imads.rediff.com/0/default/empty.gif

Ragothamam writes that there were attempts made to protect the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam from being called the conspirators behind Rajiv’s killing. In this interview with rediff.com‘s Vicky Nanjappa, Ragothaman speaks about the conspiracy and the hurdles that were faced in a probe in which many aspects were hushed up.

How has your book been received?

That is too early to tell. It is just out, but is under debate. Let us wait and watch.

You write that Dravida Munetra Kazhagam chief M Karunanidhi’s [ Images ] scheduled public meeting in Sriperumbudur on May 21, 1991, the day Rajiv was killed, was abruptly cancelled.

 Karunanidhi was to address a meeting at 6’O clock that evening, two hours before Rajiv’s meeting. The police had made all arrangements. Then there was a telegram from the Anna Arivalyam postal office jurisdiction that the meeting was cancelled.

I probed the sender of that telegram. I was told to ask Karunanidhi about the same. However, I could not investigate him directly. Later, I was told by my superiors that the matter was being looked into, and I should remain quiet.

I was also told that it was a director general of police, Rangaswamy, who had advised that the meeting be cancelled. However, when I looked at the Rangaswamy affidavit, it read that he had ordered as much police force as possible in view of this meeting.

I also attended the Jain commission inquiry in which Karunanidhi was examined. He had said then that it was the then governor, Bhishma Narayan Singh, who had told him to cancel the meeting. Look at the contradictions.

Who according to you was the one who advised cancellation of the Karunanidhi meeting?

Probably it was Marumalarchi Dravida Munetra Kazhagam leader Vaiko who telephoned and sought cancellation of the meeting. The telephone records needed to be examined, but it was never done.

Why do you think Vaiko tried to stop Karunanidhi?

After Rajiv’s assassination, many DMK workers were attacked, their offices burnt. If Karunanidhi had gone there, he would have been in trouble and there would have been an onslaught. Hence, they were trying to protect him.

Does this mean even Karunanidhi was part of the plot?

No, that is not what I meant. Karunanidhi is not a killer. He wanted a democratic solution to the problem and this was never liked by slain LTTE [ Images ] chief Prabhakaran.

You accuse Vaiko of having a hand in this entire issue.

Vaiko was the one who spoke vehemently against the Indo-Jaffna accord. Vaiko said at that time he was first an LTTE, then a Tamilian and then an Indian. At the time of the accord, Prabhakaran was brought down to New Delhi [ Images ] and was put up at the Hotel Ashoka.

Vaiko sought to meet him, but he was not allowed to do so. He conversed with Prabhakaran on the intercom, during which the latter told him, “Anna, this Rajiv has betrayed me. I feel like committing suicide as he is sealing my fate. But I cannot kill myself as I need to fight for my people.”

Vaiko wrote a book later in which he mentions that Prabakaran had thought of committing suicide.

Tell us more, sir…

When Vaiko had gone to Sri Lanka [ Images ], we had secured a videotape titledInside a Tiger’s Cave which has him on tape. There he spoke everything that was anti-Rajiv. It appeared that he was more against Rajiv than Prabakaran himself. This was also a point noted during our investigation.

Then there is also a meeting in which Vaiko says that Rajiv won’t go back alive from Tamil Nadu. He, however, retracted that statement. During the investigation, we questioned one Chinna who is on death row.

He said that in one of the hideouts, Sivarasan (the prime accused in the assassination) held talks with one Srinivas Ayya and said that after the successful completion of the mission, they should ensure that Vaiko becomes the chief minister of Tamil Nadu.

Why was the evidence not used then?

This is a question that I have been asking. We had so much evidence, but surprisingly Vaiko was roped in as prosecution witness number 250 in the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities court.

During the trial, he denied speaking all of which was on video with Prabhakaran. The video was played out. He claimed that it was him in the video but the voice was not his. It was sent for examination and the voice too was confirmed, but till date there is no perjury case against him.

You have alleged that even the Intelligence Bureau and the Research and Analysis Wing tried to cover up LTTE’s role?

After the assassination, Chandrashekhar, the then prime minister, convened a meeting in which even Janata Party president Subramanian Swamy (then minister of commerce and industry) was present. The then IB chief, MK Narayanan, and RAW boss, GS Bajpai, were also present.

Swamy said that it was obvious that the LTTE was responsible. Bajpai retorted that it was not the LTTE. The meeting was adjourned. Meanwhile, the CBI director had gone to Colombo for the investigation.

They were called back and rushed to Delhi for the meeting. During the meeting, it was again asked why a trip was made to Colombo and did that mean it was preconceived that it was the LTTE which was behind the assassination.

Bajpai once again opposed this. He even quoted one Kittu to be his source. Kittu, incidentally, was Prabhakaran’s right hand man. An LTTE man could never have been a RAW mole and even Dr Swamy had termed this as absurd.

What are your allegations against Narayanan?

A video taken at the meeting on that ill-fated day in which there were images of Dhanu was never made available to the CBI. The assassination team was waiting for nearly two hours in a sterile area. The original video reached Narayanan.

The government had decided to conduct an investigation in this regard and this case was registered with the Special Investigating Team and the CBI. However, it was buried. My question is, why no action has been taken for suppressing evidence.

It was being said that Dhanu had barged into the meeting, but this video clearly shows that they were waiting for a long time. We probed this case risking our own lives and it does upset me that people sitting at the helm of affairs are protecting the accused.

Do you think the loopholes will be rectified now?

Let us see.

 

 

Move to release Rajiv Gandhi case convicts: Political class’ adventurism will have grave consequences

 

In the context of rehabilitation of its inmates, the Tamil Nadu government’s prisons website proudly proclaims thus: “On the occasion of the release of 1,405 lifers in commemoration of the birth centenary of Perarignar Anna on 15.09.2008, a rehabilitation function was organized in Central Prison.” It is unclear what the link is between 1,405 convicted rapists and murderers and CN Annadurai’s 100th birthday.

Oddly, the very same website also draws one’s attention to Rule 335 of the state’s prison manual which provides for a sixmember advisory board including the IGP and the commissioner to consider cases for premature release of life convicts.

 

This board is supposed to consider “the behavioural pattern and social conditions of the prisoners” before recommending their release. As with every other instance of such a populist measure — infused more with unbridled personal ambition than with mercy — the board, its considerations and conclusions are mere sham. No factors are kept in mind for these mass releases, save one, ie the mood of the voter at the next election.

Both major players in Tamil Nadu, and most other state governments are equally guilty of misusing the carefully crafted remission power that they have been statutorily endowed with, and usually in wholly specious circumstances. Karunanidhi’s 50th year in the Assembly for example saw the release of 27 lifers, some of whom had violated parole as well.

 

The 55th anniversary of Kerala’s formation day saw 52 convicts released by the Congress government, including its own erstwhile minister Balakrishna Pillai who had been sentenced in a corruption case. Even more contrived was Andhra Pradesh’s release of 317 convicts to mark 150 years from the revolt of 1857.

In this background, the recent action of Jayalalithaa’s government in releasing those convicted of murdering Rajiv Gandhi and 15 others (apart from severely injuring 43 others) takes the cake, the icing and the candles when it comes to mindless political manoeuvring.

Consider these facts:

 

1.      The Supreme Court (SC) had commuted the death sentences of three of the convicts to life imprisonment — the previous day.

2. There was no pretence that the release was to commemorate any occasion.

3. The government forgot that the investigation of the case was carried out by CBI and prosecuted by its cell as well, which attracted the necessary power to be exercised by the central government under Section 435 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

4. Apart from the penal code, as the convictions were also for offences arising out of the Foreigners Act and the now repealed Tada, which are both legislations to which the Centre’s executive power extends, the mandate of the central government is imperative.

5. There admittedly seemed to be no reference to the advisory board to consider the behavioural and social factors that attended these convicts.

 


6. In what was a clear defiance of the federal arrangement, the chief minister actually had the impudence to give a threeday ultimatum to the central government to respond to the proposed release.

Hidden beneath the sheer audacity of this decision is political shrewdness of a rare degree. While aware of the political mileage that a Tamil-sympathetic move would garner, Jayalalithaa has resorted to the time-tested method adopted by our leaders everywhere — toss the ball to SC. The quick order of status quo by the court left the chief minister shrugging her shoulders as one who tried her best for the cause, and leaving it to take the blame. The same ghastly political game has played out over last week, as the passage of the Telangana bill saw parliament reach shameful depths.

The bill eventually made it through parliament ignoring the Srikrishna committee’s recommendations, the attorney general’s caution to have a Constitutional amendment, the overwhelming rejection of the bill by the Andhra legislature and more than 1,500 recommendations and comments from the state’s legislators. Once again, SC has been petitioned, and no matter what course the case will take, both the UPA and the TRS have benefited from a political game that kept the electorate on tenterhooks for five long years until the last week of its last session.

While our politically naive citizenry may not read sufficiently between the lines to understand the real motives behind every subsidy announcement, every innocuous tax amendment and every agricultural policy, what is now clearly of concern is the increasing tendency to force political moves through with impunity, and leave SC to be, as Chief Justice Patanjali Sastri put it, the sentinel on the qui vive.

 

The role of our apex court is no doubt an onerous one, and one which it has discharged with great distinction for the most part. But it is time that a clear message is sent out to the political class that such adventurism will have grave, and sometimes personal consequences.

 

Apex court stops Tamil Nadu from releasing Rajiv Gandhi killers

 

 

The Supreme Court on Thursday stopped the Tamil Nadu government from releasing seven prisoners convicted of the 1991 assassination of former prime minister Rajiv Gandhi following a petition by the Union government.

Acting on the petition, the apex court issued notices to the Tamil Nadu government and all the convicts.

Earlier, the Supreme Court agreed to urgently hear a plea by the Union government seeking a stay on the decision by the Tamil Nadu government to release the seven convicts. A bench headed by Chief Justice P. Sathasivam took up the case shortly after noon, after Solicitor General Mohan Parasaran sought a stay on the Tamil Nadu move.

The court’s decision came after Prime Minister Manmohan Singh issued a scathing criticism of the Tamil Nadu government’s decision in a statement shortly after a meeting of the Union cabinet on Thursday.

“The assassination of Shri Rajiv Gandhi was an attack on the soul of India,” Singh said.

“The release of the killers of a former Prime Minister of India and our great leader, as well as several other innocent Indians, would be contrary to all principles of justice. No government or party should be soft in our fight against terrorism,” he said.

“We have also informed the Tamil Nadu government that their proposed course of action to release the killers of Rajiv Gandhi is not legally tenable and should not be proceeded with,” Singh said.

Solicitor General Parasaran said the state government should not be allowed to release the prisoners till the apex court had decided the Union government’s review petition challenging the commutation of death sentence of three condemned prisoners to life imprisonment.

The Tamil Nadu government on Wednesday decided to free the seven convicts a day after the Supreme Court commuted the death sentences on three of them to life imprisonment because of an 11-year delay in deciding on their petitions for mercy.

Besides Santhan, Murugan and Perarivalan, whose sentences were commuted to life in prison by the Supreme Court, Tamil Nadu’s All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (AIADMK) government also decided to set at liberty Nalini, Robert Pious, Jayakumar and Ravichandran.

Gandhi was killed by a Sri Lankan Tamil suicide bomber while campaigning for elections in Sriperumbudur near Chennai in May 1991.

The three who were sentenced to death were members of a Sri Lankan ethnic Tamil separatist group, the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE), and Gandhi’s killing was seen as an act of retaliation after he sent Indian peacekeepers to Sri Lanka in 1987 to quell a Tamil uprising.

The three were convicted in 1998 and sentenced to death by hanging. Nalini was also given the death sentence but it was later commuted to a life term.

The men appealed for mercy but successive presidents did not give any decision until 2011, when their plea was rejected.

Congress vice president and Rajiv Gandhi’s son Rahul Gandhi on Wednesday said he was saddened by the Tamil Nadu government’s decision. “I am sad the killers are being freed,” said Rahul, who was 21 when his father was killed.

“If some person kills the PM and is released, then how will a common man get justice. It’s a point to ponder,” he said at an election rally in Jagdishpur, Uttar Pradesh.

 

 

Supreme Court commutes death penalty of Rajiv Gandhi’s killers to life term

 

The Supreme Court on Tuesday commuted the death penalty of Rajiv Gandhi’s killers to life term, citing the 11-year delay in deciding their mercy pleas.

With this, the three convicts on death row in the Rajiv Gandhi assassination case — Santhan, Murugan and Perarivalan — have been spared the gallows.

A bench headed by Chief Justice P Sathasivam rejected the Centre’s submission that there was no unreasonable delay in deciding their mercy plea and the condemned prisoners did not go through agonizing experience as they were enjoying life behind the bars.

 

The bench, also comprising justices Ranjan Gogoi and S K Singh, said they are unable to accept the Centre’s view and commuted the death sentence of convicts to imprisonment for life subject to remission by the government.

There had been inordinate delay on government and President’s part to decide their mercy pleas, the SC judges said.

The apex court rejected the Centre’s contention that delay in deciding mercy plea of convicts Santhan, Murugan and Perarivalan did not result in agony.

“We implore government to render advice in reasonable time to the President for taking a decision on mercy pleas,” the court said.

The top court has asked the government to add a new criteria for considering commuting death penalty to life imprisonment — inordinate delay in deciding mercy petitions.

It said the government should handle the cases of mercy petitions in a more systematic manner.

“We are confident that mercy plea can be decided at much faster speed than what is being done now,” the bench said.

The convicts had submitted that mercy plea of other prisoners, which were filed after them, were decided but their petitions were kept pending by the government.

Their plea was strongly opposed by the Centre which had said that it was not a fit case for the apex court to commute death sentence on the ground of delay in deciding mercy plea.

Admitting that there has been delay in deciding the mercy petitions, the government, however, had contended that the delay was not unreasonable, unexplainable and unconscionable to commute death penalty.

The counsel, appearing for the convicts, had contested the Centre’s arguments, saying that they have suffered due to the delay by the government in deciding the mercy petitions and the apex court should intervene and commute their death sentence to life term.

The apex court had, in May 2012, decided to adjudicate the petitions of Rajiv Gandhi killers against their death penalty and had directed that their plea, pending with the Madras high court, be sent to it.

Rajiv Gandhi was killed in May 1991. His assassins were convicted by a TADA court in January 1998 and were awarded death sentence, which was confirmed by the apex court May 11, 1999.

 

Silencing The Voices Seeking Justice

 

The public servants & the government must be role models in law  abiding acts , for others to emulate & follow. if a student makes a mistake it is excusable & can be corrected by the teacher. if the  teacher himself makes a mistake , all  his students will do the same mistake. if a thief steals , he can be caught  , legally punished & reformed . if a police himself commits crime , many thieves go scot-
free under his patronage.  even if a police , public  servant commits a crime , he can be legally prosecuted & justice can be sought by the  aggrieved. just think , if a judge himself that too of apex court of the land itself commits crime – violations of RTI Act , constitutional
rights & human rights of public  and obstructs the public from  performing their constitutional fundamental duties , what happens ? it  gives a booster dose to the rich & mighty , those in power , criminals  in public service to committ more crimes. that is exactly what is  happenning in india. the educated public must raise to the occassion &
peacefully , democratically  must oppose this criminalisation of judiciary , public service. then alone , we can build a RAM RAJYA OF  MAHATMA GANDHI’S DREAM.

 

In India, it is nothing new to silence voices seeking justice. Only on
paper , in the book called “Constitution of India” , every citizen is
treated as equal . In practice , public servants behave as public
masters & treat commoners worse . In Their crimes & actions our public
servants even outsmart British occupiers. The criminal nexus of
politician – police – public servant goes to any length to silence the
voices seeking justice  , to threaten them  , to cut-off their sources
of livelihood , to falsely implicate them  fix them in criminal
cases , to assault them & finally to finish them. Indian judiciary has
failed to uphold the “The Constitution of India” in letter & spirit.
NOW, ONE MORE VOICE SEEKING JUSTICE IS ON THE FIRING LINES OF CRIMINAL
NEXUS  – the voice of Mr. Nagaraja . M . R . editor , S.O.S-e – Voice
For Justice & SOS  e Clarion of Dalit.  Nagaraja  will sooner or later will be added along with
satyendra dubey & shanmughan Manjunath , by the criminal nexus.

Will you lend your support for this democratic , non-violent struggle
for peace , justice , along with Mr.Nagaraj.M.R. All humane persons
are welcome. Jai hind . vande matarm.

Your’s sincerely ,
Nagaraj.M.R.

 

 

 

Judge Watch http://www.judicialreforms.org/images/dots.jpg

  • Corruption, Immunity, Contempt &
    Right to Information
    The course of justice is often perverted by corruption within the judiciary and indeed within the entire system of administration of justice. This is exacerbated by the total lack of accountability of the higher judiciary including the lack of any effective disciplinary mechanism, the self acquired protection from even being investigated for criminal offences, the virtual immunity from public criticism due to the law of contempt, and finally the immunity from public scrutiny by another judicially created insulation from the Right to Information Act.
  • Anti-poor Bias
    The judicial system is increasingly used by the ruling establishment for pushing through neo liberal policies by which resources such as land, water and public spaces left with the poor and being increasingly appropriated by the rich and the powerful. This elitist and anti poor bias makes the judicial system an instrument for protecting and furthering the interest of the rich and powerful, both Indian and foreign.   This section will ‘watch’ the judges and expose their biases and any corrupt and arbitrary practices. They must see that the people are scrutinizing them and their judgments carefully.


Submitting Information
http://www.judicialreforms.org/images/dots.jpg

Judge Watch will contain information / analysis regarding any misconduct by a judge as well as anything showing the anti-poor bias of a judge.

The campaign welcomes well researched information concerning judges from any court. However, we cannot ensure that every dossier sent will be uploaded on this site or made public. All submissions must be accompanied by the relevant/required documents that may provide evidence in support of any allegations/observations made against any judge or judicial officer.

One reference document is the “Restatement of Values of Judicial Life”,a code of conduct, adopted at a full court meeting of the Supreme Court on May 7, 1997 . The Campaign does not subscribe to this as a complete document, but a starting point.

To send in information for the Judge Watch section please see the following document. Judge Watch Format [Word, 20 KB]

 

 

Judge Watch on Justice V.Ramaswami

http://www.judicialreforms.org/images/dots.jpg

  • Name of Judge: Justice V.Ramaswami
  • Post Held at Relevant Time: Chief Justice of P&H High Court
  • Current Status: Rtd. Judge of Supreme Court of India
  • Analysis/Comment/Critique:
    The first-ever impeachment motion against a SC judge, Justice V. Ramaswami, was signed by 108 MPs in 1991. A year later, an inquiry found Ramaswami “guilty of willful and gross misuses of office… “While serving as the Chief Justice of the Punjab and Haryana High Court”. Ramaswami survived the impeachment process as Parliament got divided along regional lines, southern MPs strongly supported him. Only 196 members of Parliament, less than the required two-thirds, voted for his ouster.
  • Additional documents in support of critique:

Motion of Impeachment – pdf (64 KB)
A Historic non-impeachment –)pdf (29.5 KB)

  • Details of individual / organisation writing critique:
    Name: Committee on Judicial Accountability
    Address: 66 Lawyers Chambers, Supreme Court of India, New Delhi
  • If the critique is in respect of a judge please provide
    a softcopy and/or hardcopy of the judgement

 

Judge Watch on Justice Madan Mohan Puchhi

http://www.judicialreforms.org/images/dots.jpg

  • Name of Judge: Justice Madan Mohan Punchhi
  • Rank: Former Chief Justice of India
  • Court: Supreme Court of India
  • Analysis/Comment/Critique:

This charge sheet was prepared by the Committee on Judicial Accountability in 1998, when Justice Punchhi was a judge of the Supreme Court of India. It was signed by 25 MPs of Rajya Sabha. However, before it could get the signature of the requisite number of 50 MPs of Rajya Sabha, Justice Punchhi was appointed Chief Justice of India. After this, it became virtually impossible to get the Notice of Motion signed by any MPs. Consequently, Notice of Motion could not be presented to the Speaker. The imp lesson of this exercise was that it is very difficult to get the MPs sign the impeachment motion unless three conditions are satisfied. Firstly, the charges must be very serious; secondly they must be provable by documentary evidence which is annexed to the Notice of Motion and finally, the charges must have been given substantial publicity in the media.

In the absence of all the three conditions been satisfied, MPs are afraid and reluctant to sign a charge sheet against a sitting judge. It is normally exceedingly difficult to get documentary evidence to prove charge against sitting judge, particularly in the absence of a statutory investigation by an agency having powers of investigation. Moreover, the bulk of the main stream media is afraid to publicise charges against the sitting judge for fear of contempt. In Ramaswami’s case, the above three conditions were satisfied. Documentary evidence was available against Ramaswami because of the report of the Accountant General who audited the purchases made by Ramaswami as Chief Justice of Punjab and Haryana High Court. This is why, impeachment of judges, however corrupt they might be, is not a practical remedy in discipling them.

 

  • Additional documents in support of critique:

Justice M.M.Punchhi – Notice of Motion – pdf (70 KB)

  • Details of individual / organisation writing critique:
    Name: Committee on Judicial Accountability
    Address: 66 Lawyers Chambers, Supreme Court of India, New Delhi
  • If the critique is in respect of a judge please provide
    a softcopy and/or hardcopy of the judgement

 

Judge Watch on Justice A. S. Anand

http://www.judicialreforms.org/images/dots.jpg

  • Name of Judge: Justice A.S.Anand
  • Rank: Former Chief Justice of India
  • Court: Supreme Court of India
  • Analysis/Comment/Critique:
    Serious allegations of corruption and favouritism were raised against Justice A.S.Anand former Chief Justice of India pertaining to the period when he was the Judge and the Chief Justice of the Jammu and Kashmir High Court.

These unrebutted allegations were supported by valid authentic documents and were severely raised at the time when Justice Anand was the Chief Justice of India but nothing was ever done in this regard.

  • Additional documents in support of critique:

Allegations aganist J. A.S.Anand – pdf (15.5 KB)

  • Details of individual / organisation writing critique:
    Name: Committee on Judicial Accountability
    Address: 66 Lawyers Chambers, Supreme Court of India, New Delhi
  • If the critique is in respect of a judge please provide
    a softcopy and/or hardcopy of the judgement

 

Judge Watch on Justice Vijendra Jain

http://www.judicialreforms.org/images/dots.jpg

  • Name of Judge: Justice Vijendra Jain
  • Post held at the relevant time: Judge at Delhi High Court
  • Currrent Status: Chief Justice of Punjab and Haryana High Court
  • Analysis/Comment/Critique:

Justice Vijender Jain had decided a case of a litigant Hari Ram who was the father-in-law of Justice Arun Kumar, Former Supreme Court Judge and a close friend of Justice Vijendra Jain. They personally knew well enough to have Hari Ram’s granddaughter married from his official residence. This is in violation of one of the elements of the Code of Conduct or “Restatement of Judicial Values”, adopted by the Full court in 1997 which says that no judge shall hear and decide a case of his relative or friend. Even then Justice Vijendra Jain has been recommended as Chief Justice of Punjab and Haryana High Court.

A complaint made by Subhash Agarwal against Justice Jain was rejected with no formal reasons given but he was informally told that Justice Jain did not personally know Hari Ram but since Hari Ram was the Father-in-law of Justice Arun Kumar, a close friend of Justice Jain, Justice Jain agreed to lend his residence for the wedding of Hari Ram’s granddaughter.

The Committee on Judicial Accountability wrote letters to the President and Prime Minister of India and requested them to get all correspondences made by the Complainant Subhash Agrawal to the Supreme Court in this regard.

  • Additional documents in support of critique:
    Letters sent by Committee on Judicial Accountability

Letter to President 12.8.06 – pdf (8.03 KB)
Letter to Prime Minister-)pdf (6.24 KB)

Sunday Guardian web news article 28.11.10-)pdf (132 KB)

[The name of Justice Vijender Jain, even though clearly mentioned in the tape has been withheld in this news item though the conversation itself makes it very clear who the concerned judge is.]

  • Details of individual / organisation writing critique:
    Name: Committee on Judicial Accountability
    Address: 66 Lawyers Chambers, Supreme Court of India, New Delhi

Judge Watch on Justice Ashok Kumar

http://www.judicialreforms.org/images/dots.jpg

  • Name of Judge: Justice Ashok Kumar
  • Rank: Additional Judge
  • Court: High Court of Chennai
  • Analysis/Comment/Critique:

The case of Judge Ashok Kumar of Madras who was formerly a session’s judge and has been given a permanent position in the Chennai High Court by the Chief Justice of India in February 2007 is horrifying. When the complaints were levelled against him of corruption, an inquiry report by the Intelligence Bureau (IB) gave an even more horrendous report against him. But all the reports were ignored and he was promoted to the High Court. This happened due to the political pressure from the Central Government, as the judge was close to DMK government (now ruling party of the State) and DMK government threatened to withdraw support from the UPA government. So it is due to that, that the law minister asked the CJI to give extensions and finally made Ashok Kumar a High Court judge.

 

  • Additional documents in support of critique:

Petition on the appointment of Justice A.Kumar – pdf (51.6 KB)
SC order on Justice A.Kumar’s case- pdf (7.9 KB)
Are CJIs following rules in appointment of Judges?-)pdf (6.93 KB)
Justice Ashok Kumar appoinment chalenged- pdf (10.0 KB)

  • Details of individual / organisation writing critique:
    Name: Committee on Judicial Accountability
    Address: 66 Lawyers Chambers, Supreme Court of India, New Delhi
  • If the critique is in respect of a judge please provide
    a softcopy and/or hardcopy of the judgement

 

Judge Watch on Justice Jagdish Bhalla

http://www.judicialreforms.org/images/dots.jpghttp://www.judicialreforms.org/images/dots.jpg


This is the case where the documentary evidence was available to show that the judge has purchased the property worth crores in few lakhs in the name of his wife from well-known criminal who have illegally grabbed the land. There were inquiry reports of the Additional District Magistrate and Superintendent of Police which attested to these facts. However, despite this documentary evidence being brought to the notice of the then Chief Justice of India, he neither ordered an independent investigation nor did he allow the Committee on Judicial Accountability to get a regular FIR registered, so that a normal police investigation could have taken place. This was despite the fact that under the in-house procedure, supposedly adopted by the Supreme Court of India in 1999 for investigating charges against the judges, at least an in-house committee of judges could have formed to investigate the charges against Justice Bhalla. However instead of doing that, the then Chief Justice Y.K. Sabbarwal recommended Justice Bhalla to be the Chief Justice of Kerala High Court. His appointment as Chief Justice was stopped only because of the complaint made by the Committee on Judicial Accountability to the President of India, who sent the matter back to reconsideration to the Supreme Court collegium, which thereafter could not reiterate its recommendation because of the opposition of one of the judges of the collegium, Justice B.N.Aggarwal. However, thereafter Justice Bhalla has been transferred as a judge of Chattisgarh High Court where he has been appointed as acting Chief Justice by the notification of Law Ministry. This was despite of the objection of the Committee on Judicial Accountability, that a judge, who was not found suitable as Chief Justice of Kerala, cannot be appointed as Acting Chief Justice of another High Court.

The case of Justice Bhalla demonstrates the hollowness of the so-called in-house procedure supposedly adopted by the Supreme Court for investigating charges against judges. It also demonstrates the pernicious impact of the Veraswami judgement which prevents any police investigation against a judge without the prior permission of the Chief Justice of India. The brotherhood among the judges and the fear among judges that any criminal investigation against the sitting judge would tarnish the image of Indian Judiciary has let to a situation whereby not a single sitting judge has been subjected to criminal investigation in the 17 years since the Veeraswamy judgement.


Impeachment Motion and Press Releases

  • Press Release on the Proposed Elevation of Justice Bhalla – pdf (10.5 KB)
  • Impeachment Motion sent to Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha with explanatory note- pdf (64.8 KB)
  • Press Release on the Motion of Impeachmentagainst Justice Bhalla – pdf (42.8 KB)

 

Additional documents in support

Details of individual / organisation writing critique:
Name: Committee on Judicial Accountability
Address: 66 Lawyers Chambers, Supreme Court of India, New Delhi

 

Judge Watch on Justice Y.K.Sabharwal

http://www.judicialreforms.org/images/dots.jpg

Former CJI, Justice Y.K.Sabharwal set in motion the process of sealing of properties in designated residential areas of Delhi which were being used for commercial purposes. This sealing went on relentlessly under the continuous supervision of Chief Justice Sabharwal’s bench, monitored and directed by a Court appointed monitoring committee. When the government came up with a new master plan of Delhi 2021 which allowed mixed use and commercial activity in many of the areas which were designated as residential, Justice Sabharwal orders on the sealing continued.

Some of the facts which were not publicly known was that his two sons, Chetan and Nitin had entered into partnerships with big Mall and Commercial complex developers and had become big Commercial complex developers themselves during that time. It was clear that these orders were giving direct benefit to his sons’ business. His orders are against the principles of natural justice, which say that no judge can hear a case in which he is personally interested. There was a serious conflict of interest in this case which renders his orders a nullity. It is in fact arguable that his dealing with this case in such circumstances involves an offence under the Prevention of Corruption Act.

At the same time, it was also found that several plots were allotted to the Companies or relatives of Justice Sabharwal and which needs to be investigated to see if undue favour was shown to them and if so whether there was any quid pro quo in terms of judicial orders.

The facts thrown up in this case have very disturbing implications about the integrity of our judiciary in the highest places.

Other Interventions

  • Justice Sabharwal’s Defence Becomes Murkier: Stifling Public Exposure By Using Contempt Powers -Press Release- pdf (41 KB)
  • Securing Judicial Accountability Freedom Of Speech vs. Contempt Towards An Independent Judicial Commission by Prashant Bhushan – pdf (40 KB)
  • Shocking Abuse of Judicial Power; Hindu editorial; Sep 24,2007-pdf (10.6KB)
  • Sabharwal on Trial; Times of India – pdf (28 KB)
  • Contept of Justice; Outlook online-pdf (85 KB)

Tehelka Investigation

  • Office of Profit: A Stink You Should Smell by Sanjay Dubey- pdf (35 KB)
  • Instead of helping shopkeepers, he made his sons rich- pdf (48 KB)
  • Silence Lies: Tehelka view by Shoma Chaudhary- pdf (138 KB)


“Wither Judicial Accountability? The case of Justice Sabharwal: Disquieting facts, disturbing implications”- Press Conference held on Aug 03, 2007
Press Conference was organised to highlight a grave case of Judicial Misconduct at the Apex of the Indian Judiciary. It disclosed how the then Chief Justice of India who had spearheaded the sealing drive was mired in serious conflict of interest in as much as his sons were deeply involved in the business of shopping malls and commercial complexes who stood to benefit from this sealing drive. It was addressed by Shri Shanti Bhushan, former Union Law Minister, Mr. Bhaskar Rao, Chairman, Centre for Media Studies, and Mr. Prashant Bhushan, advocate, Supreme Court among other. The Press Conference was attended by 40 news agencies and 80 participants.


Mid-day Investigation

  • Details of individual / organisation writing critique:
    Name: Committee on Judicial Accountability
    Address: 66 Lawyers Chambers, Supreme Court of India, New Delhi
  • Post held at the relevant time: Chief Justice of India, Supreme Court
  • Current Status: Retd Chief Justice of India, Supreme Court

 

Judge Watch on Justice P. D. Dinakaran

http://www.judicialreforms.org/images/dots.jpg

FThe Supreme Court collegium headed by Chief Justice K G Balakrishnan and including Justice S.H. Kapadia, Justice Tarun Chatterjee and Justice R.V. Raveendran had recommended in August 2009, Justice P.D. Dinakaran, the Chief Justice of Karnataka High Court, for elevation to the Supreme Court. The recommendations came along with the names of four other Judges for elevation to the Apex court namely, Justice AK Patnayak (Chief Justice of Madhya Pradesh High Court), Justice Tirath Singh Thakur, (Chief Justice of Punjab and Haryana High Court), Justice SS Nijjar (Chief Justice of Calcutta High Court) and Justice KS Radhakrishna ( Chief Justice of Gujarat High Court). While the decks were cleared for the elevation of the latter four Judges, iimmediately after the news of Justice Dinakaran’s proposed appointment became known, a group of highly respected and responsible lawyers from Chennai called the Forum for Judicial Accountability sent a series of representations to the Collegium and the government detailing several very damaging allegations against him. These included, acquiring more than 350 acres of agricultural land and encroaching on another more than hundred acres of public land; acquiring properties benami and far beyond his known sources of income; hearing and deciding cases of his friends etc. All the allegations were backed by unimpeachable documentary evidence.
Though the Chief Justice of India, continued to back him, he ordered an inquiry into the allegation regarding his agricultural land by the District Magistrate, who confirmed the allegations including his encroachment of public land. Thereafter Justice Dinakaran tried to destroy evidence and threatened the revenue officials who went to stop this destruction of evidence. All this came to be widely reported in the media. An embarrassed PMO forced a reluctant Law Minister Moily to return the recommendation to the collegium for reconsideration. The collegium did not withdraw the recommendation, but merely put it on hold. No “in house inquiry” was ordered either.
Meanwhile people questioned how Dinakaran could continue as Chief Justice of Karnataka in the light of such serious offences that he had committed. There was also the demand that FIRs should be registered and the offences that he had committed be investigated. The Chief Justice of India however did not give permission for registering any FIR against Justice Dinakaran. This left no option but to initiate impeachment proceedings against him. The Forum for Judicial Accountability prepared the impeachment motion which was sent to all the political parties by a campaign for signatures. Eventually 75 MPs of the Rajya Sabha, belonging to many political parties except the Congress party signed the impeachment motion and presented it to the Vice President. The motion was soon admitted by the Vice President forcing Justice Dinakaran to stop discharging judicial functions.
The procedure laid down by the Judges Inquiry Act for proceeding with an impeachment motion is that the Vice President appoints an enquiry committee consisting of a sitting judge of the Supreme Court, a Chief Justice of a High Court and a jurist to enquire into the charges against him. Only if the enquiry committee finds him guilty does the matter proceed further for a voting in the two houses of Parliament. The motion for his removal has to be then passed by a two third majority in each house. Only then can he be removed. Though there is no requirement under the Judges Inquiry Act for the Vice President to consult the Chief Justice in the choice of members of the enquiry committee, he consulted the Chief Justice, who recommended two judges of the Supreme Court and two Chief Justices of the High Court. Based on the Chief Justice’s advice, the Vice President has appointed an inquiry committee comprising of Justice V.S. Sirupurkar of the Supreme Court, Chief Justice A.R. Dave of the A.P. High Court and Shri P.P. Rao as the jurist.
The Campaign for Judicial Accountability and Reform as well as the Forum for Judicial Accountability have however written to the V.P. pointing out that Justice Sirupurkar has not only been a close friend and colleague of Justice Dinakaran, but he has also prejudged the issue, telling several responsible lawyers that he knows Justice Dinakaran well and that he is an independently wealthy and honourable man. Moreover, Shri P.P. Rao had been formally consulted by Justice Dinakaran on how he should deal with these charges and that he had advised him on the matter. In these circumstances, they would not be seen to be impartial and therefore should not sit as judges on this inquiry committee to avoid damage to the credibility of the inquiry and further controversy. However till the date of writing they have not yet recused themselves.

Representations by the Forum for Judicial Accountability to the Collegium

  • Representation 1 against Mr.Justice P.D.Dinakaran, Chief Justice, Karnataka High Court – amassing of huge assets, corruption and serious irregularities.- pdf
  • Representation 2, Further particulars with supporting materials regarding Mr. Justice P.D.Dinakaran, Chief Justice of Karnataka- pdf
  • Representation 3, Details of more acquisitions by Justice P.D.Dinakaran-pdf
  • Representation 4, Details of more acquisitions and improper judicial conduct of Justice P.D.Dinakaran.- pdf

Motion for Impeachement of Justice Dinakaran

The notice of motion for presenting an address to the President of India for the removal of Justice Dinakaran, Chief Justice of the Karanataka High Court, under Article 217 read with Article 124(4) of Constitution of India for his various acts of misbehavior, including dishonest judicial orders, irregular and dishonest administrative actions, etc, along with an explanatory note on the motion for impeachement. pdf

Press Statement against Survery of India probe into Justice Dinakaran encroachment

Press Statement issued by the Forum for Judicial Accountability against the Survey of India spot probe into the allegations of land encroachment by the Karnataka Chief Justice, P.D. Dinakaran, to be conducted on December 30th 2009 as reported in a newspaper.
The Forum calls upon the Central Government to recall the three member team deputed by the Survey of India immediately and to await the outcome of the enquiry under the impeachment proceedings. …statement page 1 statement page 2

CJAR letter to the Vice President regarding the enquiry committee in the Justice Dinakaran impeachment

The Campaign for Judicial Accountability and Reform has sent a letter to Shri Hamid Ansari, Vice President of India, regarding the 3 member enquiry committee appointed to enquire into the motion for removal of Jusitce P.D. Dinakaran. The letter brings to Shri Ansari’s notice that Justice Sirupurkar’s friendship with Justice Dinakaran, coupled with his prejudgement of the matter, places him in a position where if he inquires into this matter, justice will not be seen to be done. The same would be the case with Shri P.P. Rao who has been formally consulted in the matter by Justice Dinakaran. The letter further requests that these facts be placed before Justice Sirupurkar and Shri P.P. Rao and they be asked whether they would like to recuse themselves from the inquiry committee, to avoid any further controversy in the matter. psdf

Articles

  • Extraordinary situations call for extraordinary measures -Justice D Y Shylendra Kumar pdf
  • The Dinakaran Imbroglio: Appointments and Complaints against Judges – Mr. Prashant Bhushan pdf
  • Details of individual / organisation writing critique:
    Name: Campaign for Judicial Accountability and Reform
    Address: 6/6 Jungpura B (basement), Mathura Road, New Delhi: 110014
  • Post held at the relevant time: Chief Justice, Karnataka High Court
  • Current Status: Chief Justice, Karanataka High Court

 

Judge Watch on Justice F.I.Rebello

http://www.judicialreforms.org/images/dots.jpg

  • Name of Judge: Justice F. I. Rebello
  • Post Held at Relevant Time: Chief Justice of Allahabad High Court
  • Current Status: Chief Justice, Allahabad High Court
  • Analysis/Comment/Critique:
    Justice Rebello, son after joining as the Chief justice of Allahabad High Court met Ms Mayawati, Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh. He, then issued administrative orders to change the classification of the case related to Ms Mayawati’s involvement in Taj Corridor’s case. As a result, the case, which was part heard by a different bench was transfered to a completely new bench. This was allegedly done to benefit Ms Mayawati.
  • Additional documents in support of critique:

CJAR’s complaint against Justice Rebello- pdf

 

Judicial Accountability http://www.judicialreforms.org/images/dots.jpgIt is important to keep the judiciary in the purview of scrutiny. This section will provide various subjects to get judiciary accountable to common person.
Appointments
http://www.judicialreforms.org/images/dots.jpg

Making reference to the K. Veeraswamy’s Case Shri Shanti Bhushan observed that all judges should declare their assets – it should be done with pride! Why raise issues of self-respect? He said only those who have something to hide will be reluctant to disclose their assets! …more

S.P.Gupta pdf (1.6 MB)
A seven Judges Bench of Supreme Court extensively considered the issues of Independence of Judiciary in relation to the appointment and transfer of Judges, the issue of appointment of the Additional Judges of the High Court, the issue of the privilege of the Government against disclosure of State documents and the scope of judicial review of the powers exercised by the President.

While deciding the issue of the locus standi of the petitioning lawyers who had challenged the Circular of the Law Minister and short-term extensions of Additional Judges on ground of attack on the independence of the judiciary, Justice P.N. Bhagwati while upholding their right to do so held that where the effected persons are really helpless, the Supreme Court will not insist on a regular writ petition to be filed by the public spirited individual espousing their cause. The Court will readily respond even to a letter addressed by said individual espousing the public cause.

A bunch of cases were decided together in the present case which were raised in two batches of writ petitions filed in different High Courts which were transferred under Article 139-A to the Supreme Court since they raised common issues of great constitutional importance. One writ was also filed in the Supreme Court. Several more related issues were raised and discussed during the hearing. Each of the Judges delivered a separate judgment.

Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association Vs. Union of India
pdf (475 KB)
This case directed to constitute a Bench of nine Judges to examine the two questions referred therein, namely, the position of the Chief Justice of India with reference to primacy, and justiciability of fixation of Judge strength.


Impeachment
http://www.judicialreforms.org/images/dots.jpg

Article 124 (4) of Indian Consitution: A Judge of the Supreme Court shall not be removed from his office except by an order of the President passed after an address by each House of Parliament supported by a majority of the total membership of that House and by a majority of not less than two-thirds of the members of that House present and voting has been presented to the President in the same session for such removal on the ground of proved misbehaviour or incapacity.

Justice V. Ramaswamypdf (64 KB)
The first-ever impeachment motion against a SC judge, Justice V. Ramaswami, was signed by 108 MPs in 1991. A year later, an inquiry found Ramaswami “guilty of willful and gross misuses of office… “While serving as the Chief Justice of the Punjab and Haryana High Court”. Ramaswami survived the impeachment process as Parliament got divided along regional lines, southern MPs strongly supported him. Only 196 members of Parliament, less than the required two-thirds, voted for his ouster.
A Historic Non-impeachementpdf (29.5 KB)

Justice M.M. Punchipdf (70 KB)
This charge sheet was prepared by the Committee on Judicial Accountability in 1998, when Justice Punchhi was a judge of the Supreme Court of India. It was signed by 25 MPs of Rajya Sabha. However, before it could get the signature of the requisite number of 50 MPs of Rajya Sabha, Justice Punchhi was appointed Chief Justice of India. After this, it became virtually impossible to get the Notice of Motion signed by any MPs. Consequently, Notice of Motion could not be presented to the Speaker. The imp lesson of this exercise was that it is very difficult to get the MPs sign the impeachment motion unless three conditions are satisfied. Firstly, the charges must be very serious; secondly they must be provable by documentary evidence which is annexed to the Notice of Motion and finally, the charges must have been given substantial publicity in the media.

In the absence of all the three conditions been satisfied, MPs are afraid and reluctant to sign a charge sheet against a sitting judge. It is normally exceedingly difficult to get documentary evidence to prove charge against sitting judge, particularly in the absence of a statutory investigation by an agency having powers of investigation. Moreover, the bulk of the main stream media is afraid to publicise charges against the sitting judge for fear of contempt. In Ramaswami’s case, the above three conditions were satisfied. Documentary evidence was available against Ramaswami because of the report of the Accountant General who audited the purchases made by Ramaswami as Chief Justice of Punjab and Haryana High Court. This is why, impeachment of judges, however corrupt they might be, is not a practical remedy in discipling them.

– Justice A.S. Anand – pdf (15.5 KB)
Serious allegations of corruption and favouritism were raised against Justice A.S.Anand former Chief Justice of India pertaining to the period when he was the Judge and the Chief Justice of the Jammu and Kashmir High Court.


Read more articles….. http://www.judicialreforms.org/images/dots.jpgA conflict between law and morality pdf (10 KB)
Contempt http://www.judicialreforms.org/images/dots.jpgContempt of court: judgement by Justice Arijit Pasayatpdf (26.5 KB) Contempt of court: judgement by Justice Raveendranpdf (24.1 KB)Judges in their own cause: Contempt of court by Prashant Bhushanpdf (19.2 KB) Contempt of court: need for a second look by J.Markandey Katjupdf (12.5 KB) Standing Committee report on Contempt pdf (58.4 KB) Affidavits of Arundhati Roy pdf (24.2 KB) and Medha Patkar on contempt pdf (17.0 KB)
Right to Information and Judiciary http://www.judicialreforms.org/images/dots.jpgRight to Information And The Judiciary By Prashant Bhushanpdf (72 KB)
Investigations against Judges http://www.judicialreforms.org/images/dots.jpg

Justice K. Veeraswamypdf (177 KB)
Justice K.Veeraswamy the then Chief Justice of Madras High Court was charged for possession of assets disproportionate to his known sources of income and a case was filed against him by the CBI under the Prevention of Corruption Act. The High Court of Madras dismissed his Petition for quashing of the Case against him and referred the matter to the Supreme Court for deciding certain questions of law. The Supreme Court while deciding the case against the delinquent Judge laid down strict guidelines to protect the independence of Judiciary according to which no F.I.R. can be registered against a Judge or Chief Justice of the High Court, or a Judge of the Supreme Court without the sanction of the Chief Justice of India in the matter. It was held that the Supreme Court is not a court of limited jurisdiction of only dispute settling, and that the court has been a law maker and it is the courts responsibility and duty to apply the existing law in a form more conducive to the independence of the judiciary. It was also said that any complaint against a Judge and its investigation by the CBI, if given publicity will have a far reaching impact on the judge and the litigant public therefore there is need of a judicious use of taking action under the Prevention of Corruption Act.

– Judicial Accountability OR Illusion – The National Judicial Council Bill by Prashant Bhushan pdf (8.83 KB)

– Judicial Accountability by Prashant Bhushan pdf (9.61 KB)

– Mechanisms of Judicial Accountability by Justice J.S.Verma pdf (11.2 KB)

 

 

Judicial Reforms http://www.judicialreforms.org/images/dots.jpgThe current judicial system needs to be cleared of procedural complexities and hurdles to make it accessible for the common citizens. It must be strengthened to deliver justice quickly, efficiently and honestly. This section contains links and updates on various laws and policies (existing and proposed) and an analysis of the same.

Access of Poor and Delays in Justice

http://www.judicialreforms.org/images/dots.jpg

Who do these delays and backlogs impact the most? How do they impact access to justice? In case of the criminal cases, the poor people are the most affected. More than 70% of persons inside jails who are held on suspicion of having committed a crime are not able to pay the bail amount, which is very high. They are inside the jails for months and years, as they cannot afford a lawyer. …more


Values and Attitude towards the poor

http://www.judicialreforms.org/images/dots.jpg

  • Labour
    After independence, the concept of social justice was introduced and the labour law developed more as a judgment law. There were various laws but with the intervention of judiciary, the labour law was moving in a progressive direction. The issues concerning the labour matters such as wage, minimum wage, fair wage, employment security, social security, etc. were initiated, right from the Express Newspaper’s case.…more
  • Urban Poor
    One broad category of urban poor is the slum dwellers living in unorganized housing sector, having occupation of street vendors, rickshaw pullers, etc. This is the section, which has suffered the maximum onslaught of judicial decision in the recent past. …more  
  • Rural Poor
    This debate is quite crucial, which is reminiscent of what happened with judiciary during the period when India was trying to abolish Zamindari system and introduce land reforms. While reflecting on the judiciary and its impact on the rural poor, the most popular analysis is the class analysis but one should not confine to it alone, one should also consider caste analysis. We must also remember the indigenous people. …more
  • Public Interest Litigation
    It is important to discuss about the reasons for developing a tool like Public Interest Litigation and how it has transformed recently. While criticizing judiciary one must not forget about the executive inactions of last ten years and the recent laws passed by the legislature. It is necessary to substantiate by two examples, one is aquaculture case which permitted the multinational corporations to have their aquaculture activities at the cost of the traditional fishermen. …more

 

Covering up Late  PM Rajiv  Gandhi Assassination conspiracy

 

The GOI  & investigating authorities have failed to punish the real master minds behind the Late Prime minister Shri . Rajiv Gandhi assassination case .

When  a responsible Indian citizen volunteered to appear before the supreme court of india as an amicus curie , to give certain information before the court relating to this assassination , he was not at all permitted. Instead he was threatened , attempts made to murder him , his news paper was closed , his jobs were illegally snatched away , police & investigating agencies repeatedly grilled him ,  THE PURPOSE IS TO SILENCE THAT PERSON . The Police failed to act upon his complaints. The Supreme Court of India Failed to admit his PIL Petitions. ALL TO COVER UP THE POWERS THAT BE .

 

who are covering-up late p.m. rajiv gandhi assassination case? who are those conspirators? who are trying to silence me?

My sufferings began hand in hand with my crusade. I have raised various issues of social concern from time to time at the appropriate levels, one of those is LATE P.M. RAJIV GANDHI ASASSINATION CASE. where-in only the tools of the conspirator’s were punished where as the conspirators are roaming free. i have raised this topic of inequity , travesty of justice and sought a fair, proper enquiry& trial , at various forums. but to no avail.
the conspirators were disturbed by this and tried to silence me by threatening me, physically assaulting me and even made attempts to murder me. they prevented me from appearing before the JAIN COMMISSION OF ENQUIRY. they even manipulated the recruitment systems to deny me the appointments in R.B.I.CURRENCY NOTE PRESS MYSORE, P.E.S. COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING MANDYA, N.I.E MYSORE , District Court Mysore & Illegally snatched away my job in RPG Cables  Ltd , Mysore . they even tried to silence me by forcibly closing down my newspaper publications THE TESTUDO & VOICE OF CRUSADER.
my appeals for justice resulted only in police enquiries. the central intelligence bureau(I.B.) state intelligence & state police personnel enquired me exhaustively number of times, but they never did enquire the powers that be. any way these people don’t have practical powers to enquire such people. the highest constitutional functionaries who can order a proper enquiry, trial are keeping mum inspite of repeated appeals. probably they are acting under the directions of conspirators. thereby they are not only covering up the crime, they are actively sponsoring terrorism , but are also violating my fundamental/human rights & obstructing me from performing my fundamental duties as a citizen of india.

hereby , i do request you to protect my fundamental & human rights and to facilitate me to perform my FUNDAMENTAL DUTIES as a citizen of india.also, i do request you to give me information about following cases ,it’s final reports& it’s action taken report.
1.the roost resort scandal involving karnataka high court judges.
2.the scam of gem cutting & polishing units in mysore set-up under VISHWA self-employment scheme.
3.the murder of under-trial,TADA detenue mr.arjunan(forest brigand veerappan’s brother).
4.the murder of journalist mr.satyanarayan near mysore.
5.the murder of ex-minister mr.nagappa near mysore.
6.the amount of ransom paid by state governments of karnataka,tamilnadu & the union govrnment and the general public to forest brigand veerappan during all kidnap episodes (including movie star rajkumar’s).the role played by facilitators.the contents of all cassettes sent by veerappan to governments & vice versa.
7.the final report of justice a.j. sadashivas’s committee which enquired into atrocities & human rights violations committed by police,special task force(S.T.F.) on the innocent tribal people of M.M.HILLS.
8.the report of past district magistrate of mysore mr.T.M.vijayabhaskar about the land scam in & around mysore.
9.even in developed countrise like U.S.A. & U.K. mal-handling of radio-active materials takes place now & then, which in itself constitute nuclear disasters on small scale.refer the DECCAN HERALD (12/10/03 to18/10/03).in india how many cases of mal-handling of radio-active materials have taken place? no public knowledge.in the back drop of corrupt,negligent,hush-hush,buck passing work culture in most of the government service in india, i do want to know how safe are we the mysoreans from the processing & storage of radio-active materials at M/S RARE EARTH MATERIALS PLANT,yelwal,mysore? in the past there were media reports about damages caused to the human beings ,the environment by the same organisation M/S R.E.M.P. & it’s sister concern M/S URANIUM CORPORATION OF INDIA LIMITED(U.C.I.L.) at kerala state & at jadaguda ,orissa state respectively.even some of the insurance companies like M/S.metlife india insurance co.,don’t cover the risk of health damages ,death due to nuclear hazards.in such an event who will bear the cost of compensation?how the quantum of compensation is calculated?give me information about the safety measures taken by M/S. R,E,M.P.mysore & the compensation pay sructure and the safety measures being followed by all agencies dealing with radio-active materials.

 

‘Role of Vaiko, Karunanidhi in Rajiv assassination not probed’

 

The chief investigating officer of the Rajiv Gandhi assassination case, K Ragothaman, has alleged that the then DMK leader Vaiko, as a prosecution witness, turned hostile and escaped the charge for perjury at the behest of the former SIT chief D R Karthikeyan.
In his book ‘Conspiracy to kill Rajiv Gandhi – from CBI files’, Ragothaman said that during the investigation more than 500 video cassettes were seized, including a cassette titled ‘In tigers cave’ revealing Vaiko’s clandestine visit to the LTTE area in Jaffna.
“He was speaking vulgarly about Rajiv Gandhi and spitting venom on Rajiv. It is also found that he met Pottu Amman when he was introduced to him by Prabhakaran. Vaiko was not questioned on this. Also, he was made witness to speak about his conversation with Prabhakaran while he was kept in the Ashoka Hotel, prior to signing of Indo-Sri Lanka accord,” Ragothaman wrote.
During the trial, Vaiko refused to admit voice on a video clip of a meeting secured by investigators, in which, he is heard saying that he told Prabhakaran over the intercom in Ashoka Hotel that ‘Rajiv Gandhi stabbed him in the back and the proposed accord was not the solution for achieving Tamil Eelam.’ Soon after the meeting between Prabhakaran and Rajiv Gandhi, on the Indo-Sri Lanka accord, Vaiko had a talk with Prabhakaran on intercom.
Ragothaman has also dragged DMK patriarch Karunanidhi, who abruptly cancelled his meeting at Sriperumbudur on May 21, 1991, to the centre of controversy. Ragothaman wrote, “When I had collected the evidence about the cancellation of the meeting and brought to the notice of the chief of SIT to question the DMK leader on that issue, I was told that part of investigation was done by him and that DGP Rangasamy had requested the DMK leader to cancel the meeting. Also, I was chided by SIT chief asking me not to create such issues as I had done in Rasheed Murder case.”
Speaking to the ‘Express’, Ragothaman said that he opposed Vaiko as witness and told SIT chief that he appears to be a suspect.
“SIT chief Karthikeyan told me there was not sufficient evidence against Vaiko. Also, starting point of our investigation should have been cancellation of Karunanidhi’s trip to Sriperumbudur, but Karthikeyan did not allow probe into it,” Ragothaman said.
Karthikeyan, hailed as one of the most relentless investigators, vehemently refuted the charges authored by his own team member.
“He is flogging the dead horse. No way can anybody question the integrity of an investigation and nothing remains to be done. All the aspects were explored by the 40-member team 20 years ago and SIT had received words of appreciation from two judicial commissions on record. The Supreme Court placed on record appreciation for my leadership,” Karthikeyan told Express.

 

SDPI demands re-opening of probe into Rajiv Gandhi’s assassination case

 

Bhopal: The Social Democratic Party of India, (SDPI), has demanded the re-opening of the probe into former Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi’s assassination case after 21 years following a sensational disclosure that a crucial video of the assassination was suppressed by the then IB (Intelligence Bureau) Chief and now West Bengal Governor M. K. Narayanan.
SDPI national president Mr. E. Abubacker in a statement said that the allegation is serious. “If there such a video as claimed by the investigating officer, then it warrants another probe. The matter should be looked into,” said, Mr. Abubacker.
Mr. Abubacker said that it is learnt that when news-hounds tracked Mr. Narayanan, who is now in Melbourne on a visit, reportedly avoided direct question but at the same time there was no denial. Narayanan claims all evidence is already present with the investigating agency.
The statement stated that the chief investigating officer of the Rajiv Gandhi assassination case, K. Ragothaman in his just-published book, “Conspiracy to kill Rajiv Gandhi – From CBI files”, has claimed that the tape, which had been taken from the videographer by IB the day after Rajiv Gandhi had been blown by Dhanu on May 21, 1991, was never shared with the Special Investigation Team, (SIT), in the investigation of the assassination. In the book Ragothaman said that although a “preliminary enquiry” had been conducted in connection with the missing video, Narayanan had been “allowed to go scot-free” by the SIT chief D. R. Karthikeyan.
Similarly, the statement said that Adv. S. Doraisamy, who pleaded for Nalini, one of those convicted in the Rajiv Gandhi assassination case, has written a book, claiming to unravel the mysteries and nail the bungling by the SIT chief Karthikeyan. The soon-to-be published book, tentatively titled “Mysteries and Secrets Behind the Rajiv Gandhi Murder”, alleges a larger conspiracy.
SDPI chief wondered that a nation’s leader is assassinated and even that has to be suppressed. “So much for freedom of speech and expression and national security. Dig deeper, you will get to know beyond LTTE in Rajiv’s assassination. There are too many loop holes, convenient decisions taken in finishing Rajiv’s case in order to frame LTTE and put a full stop. Many facts were not properly investigated. Many issues were suppressed, as the book says, by Narayanan and Karthikeyan. Rajiv Gandhi was killed not only by the Lankan Tamils but also allegedly by some Congressmen,” he added.
He pointed out that the alleged manipulation, according to Ragothaman, was meant to erase video evidence of the kind of people Dhanu had interacted with at the venue, thereby sparing embarrassment to the Congress party in the middle of the 1991 Lok Sabha elections. The author asked: Would Narayanan have dared “to damage the goal of the Congress party, irrespective of his personal affiliation to Rajiv Gandhi’s family?” As such Narayanan’s connections are of doubtful nature and can be probed into to unravel the truth.
He said that Adv. Doraisamy, who reportedly in an interview remarked: “I have the evidence to prove that Rajiv Gandhi murder was an inside job. But the SIT headed by then Inspector General of Police Karthikeyan never pushed the investigation in the right direction”, requires a serious attention and should not be wished away.
Mr. Abubacker said that in view of the revelations made in the two books the unpleasant facts should not be swept under the carpet but thoroughly investigated to unmask the real conspirators and the culprits so that the people at large know the faces who eliminated the former Prime Minister for their vested interests.
Following the assassination of Rajiv Gandhi mysterious forces like P. V. Narsimha Rao took the top slot of Indian administration. Since Rao’s era India’s cooperation with Israel has increased manifolds at the cost of struggling Palestinian’s woes. The influence of the United States of America also increased on the Indian administration, he added.

 

Rajiv Assasination – Unanswered questions

 


Rajiv Gandhi assasination – leaves many unanswered questions – Unsolved puzzles. For whom did Rajiv Gandhi got assisinated ? Sudhangan raised various questions which didn’t get answers till 2009. Here are those questions that are unanswered:
1) On 21 -May-1991 Rajiv gandhi started from Delhi for election campaign and reached Chennai through the route Orissa and Andra Pradesh. How did he accepted that midnight meeting at Sriperambuthur which was not in the agenda of TamilNadu Congress committe. ?
2) Is there any plan made somewhere to bring Rajiv Gandhi to Sriperambathur some how ?
3) The Security official Mr O.P.Sagar was there with Rajiv Gandhi when he campaigned at Bhubaneshwar and Vishakapattinam. But he didnt come to chennai along with Rajiv. Why ?
4) Bulgarian television journalists came along with Rajiv during his visits to record his campaigns. They were with Rajiv in Orissa and Andha Predesh but didnt come for the next meeting. They stayed in a luxary hotel at Vishakapatinam along with their special flight pilot. In that case why did they came ?
5) When Rajiv was about to start, there was a problem in the flight. So he went back to circuit house from the airport. After the problem in flight got fixed, the chief minister of Andha Pradesh Mr.VijayaBhaskar Reddy informed Rajiv to get back to airport and Rajiv went to airport. During this time the two Bulgerian journalists took the security official Sagar along in their car and arrived at airport late. So the security official could not go along with Rajiv gandhi. Why did such an experienced security official was made not to travel with Rajiv ?
6) The security official of Rajiv at chennai P.C.Gupta was waiting at chennai airport for Rajiv. P.C.Gupts is suppose to get the gun from Sagar who was expected along with Rajiv. Since Sagar has not come along with Rajiv, P.C.Gupta was made to go with Rajiv without gun. Is there any intenton behind this ?
7) When Rajiv started from Meenambakkam, two ladies claiming as journalists got inside his car at Ramavaram. Did their identities verified ? Why did the special investigation branch didnt enquire on them ?
8) Who are the Bulgarian journalists ? Where did they went ?
9) Who are those two lady journalists ? Where did they went ?
10) Those two lady journalists interviewed Rajiv Gandhi. But TamilNadu political party people, Tha. Pandiyan and Maragatham Chandrasekar were telling they didnt know what Rajiv spoke with the journalists. What are the hiding ?
11) Just one hour before his murder, Rajiv told it was CIA that killed the pakistan president Zia-ul-Haq. Why shoud he tell that ? What made him to tell that ? Did he know if there is some plan like that against him ?
12) July-1991 – The central home minister S.P.Chawan made a statement that apart from LTTE there are other international organizations and powerful external forces involved in the background of Rajiv’s murder. Who are they referred here ?
13) Why didn’t the special investination branch enquire on the above home minister’s statement ?
14) During the gulf war India helped fueling US aircrafts. Rajiv gandhi seriously condemmed this help which was done by primie minister Mr Chandrasekar during that time. Why didnt the special investigation branch enquire on CIA’s hands on this murder, as US was not happy with Rajiv for the above reason ?
15) Palestinian National Authority president, Mr. Yasser Arafat informed to the indian prime minister during the time Mr .Chandrasekar that ‘Rajiv Gandhi’s life is under threat’. From where did Arafat got this information ? Who is threatening Rajiv ? Why did special investigation branch didnt enquire on this ?
16) Arafat could have got this information if the assasination was planned at western Europe or middle eastern countries. Why is this not probed ?
17) Maragatham Chandrasekar came to attend that meeting with Rajiv Gandhi. Her daughter, Latha Priyakumar came with her husband and advocate Mahendran from Arakonam. But it was unknown from where did her son Lalith Chandrasekar and his wife Vinothini came from. Though it is known that Vinothini is daughter of Jayavarthane from Sri Lanka, they didn’t enquire on her. Infact they didnt enquire their family who was there at the meeting. why ?
18) Sivarasan’s mother and Vinothini’s father are sinhalas from Sri Lanka who were present at the incident. It is possible that they were sent by Sri Lankan president Premadasa as messangers. Premadasa is not happy with Rajiv on sending the Indian peace keeping force (IPKF) to Sri Lanka. Why was the investigation not done in that angle ? ( Also we should note here a Sinhala Sri Lankan army person hit Rajiv Gandhi with a gun during his visit to Sri Lanka )
19) Both LTTE and Sri Lanka hate Rajiv gandhi as he is the reaon for sending Indian peace keeping force (IPKF) to Sri Lanka. Advocate Mr Chandrasekar challenged special investigation branch that, if they could prove Vinothini and her family are innocent then those who did the crime will accept it on their own. But the special investination didnt accept his challence and not enquired those who is related on this. why ?
20) Kamini Disanayaka, Athulath Muthali, Wickramasinghe are prominant politicians in Sri Lanka. When all those people are murdered president Premadasa was pointed. Why did’t the investigation didnt happen in this angle ?
21) Why dont Sivarasan, Dhanu and Subha did this murder due to pressure from external forces. Just because they are Tamils from yarlpanam, did the investigators linked them with LTTE and closed the case ?
22) What is the strong evidence that links LTTE and its head Prabhakaran to Rajiv’s assasination case. ?
23) What is the proof that Srivarasan spoke to Prabhakaran thro a radio. Why is this not an assumption ?
24) It is very much possible that politicians within the congress could have considered Rajiv Gandhi is blocking their development within the party and could have hired some group to assasinate Rajiv. This motivation cannot be denied.
25) Various international business people specifically those selling weapons would have been in contact with Rajiv as a prime minister. They could have hired the assasinators to do this murder. Did investigators probed this ?
26) What if Sri Lanka did this, thinking India might send the Indian peace keeping force again to their country and didnt like a strong leader emerging from India ?
27) CIA always had interest in erradicating leaders in all third world countries. Did the same kind of interest got applied on Rajiv ?
28) Rajiv Gandhi is the only leader who prevents the other prominant political party in India BJP to get into power. It is possible that the indian parties like BJP and RSS could have used the ‘Hindu favourable’ LTTE and Sri Lankan tamils to do this assasination.
29) When other major Congress party members in Tamilnadu like Vazhapaadi and Moopanar didnt take interest in getting Rajiv to this meeting, Maragatham Chandrasekar traveled to Delhi and forced Rajiv to come for this meeting at Sriperambuthur. Is that without her knowledge she become one reason for Rajiv’s murder ?
30 ) Who is Pottu Amaan ? Is there a person like that ? LTTE says there was a senior person by name Amaan who died war and the only person there is Pottu. How did the special investigation branch stamped someone who is not alive as second criminal in this case ?
31) There are many parallels between the murder of Padmanabha and that of Rajiv Gandhi. Padmanabha’s murder was investigaed by TamilNadu queue branch police and Rajiv Gandhi’s murder was investigated by special investigation branch. Both the investigators are telling the murder was planned at Yarlpanam, Sri Lanka. Sivaraasan was identified as the prime criminal in both the Padmanabha’s case as well as Rajiv’ case. Prabhakaran was considered criminal in Rajiv’s assasination case bur was not in Padmanabha’s case. How come ? It shows adding Prabhakaran’s name came out of political decision rather than that came out from investigations. It is clearly an effort taken by special investigation branch to to give life to their case intentionally.
32) A famous Sri Lankan tamil poet Kasi. Anandan met Rajiv at the airport. What message did he got from Prabhakaran to Rajiv gandhi ? If Prabhakaran seeked Rajiv’s help in the freedom struggle of Tamil Eelam through Kasi Anandan, why would Prabhakaran murder Rajiv Gandhi ?
33) Prabhakaran knows it is from India and TamilNadu that he can get support and sympathy. Did Prabhakaran done such a foollish activity by killing Rajiv, to loose all the support of Indians and also get the organization banned ?
34) Latha Kannan stopped Rajiv and read a poetry for him. That enabled Dhanu, a suside bomber standing next to her, to burst the bomb. Why is her name is not included in the criminals list ? Dhanu used only Latha kannan to get inside. When HariBabu who got killed in the blast got included in the criminal’s list why not Latha Kannan ? Why is special investigation branch showing softness towards congress members ?
35) Before getting to SriPambuthur, Rajiv spoke at two roadside gatherings. Vazhapaadi Ramamurthy, the TamilNadu congress leader was with him in those two places. But at Sri Perambuthur meeting he was standing very far from Rajiv. Why so ?
36) Many innocent people and security personnels died along with Rajiv Gandhi. But nothing happened to any of the congress party members not even minor injury. How ?
37) It was believed that Latha Kumar who brought Sivarasan, Dhanu and Subha to SriPerambuthur. She took them specifically to ladies section and told Latha Kannan to take care of them. But Latha Kumar’s name is not in the criminal’s list. Why ?
38) How can we say Prabhakaran is involved just based on an old photograph of Sivarasan with Prabhakaran ?
39) Why is it not possible that Sivarasan, Dhanu and Subha are expelled from LTTE and they have been hired by western, European, Middle East or India as professional assasinators.
40) Ranganathan confessed that it was based on request by Margret Alva that he gave his house at Bangalore for rent to Sivarasan. Did they enquired how far this is true ?
41) Is there any investigation done on involvement of Chandra Swami, Subramanyam Swamy , Chandrasekar and arms business person Kasoki in this murder ?
42) What kind of benifit LTTE get by murdering Rajiv Gandhi ? Did super powers like US helped them by arms through CIA ?
43) Why do we need CBI & Special Investigation branch which find few people they prefer to get the reports ?
Unless all these confusions are clarified, the real culprit will be hiding behind some powerful forces.

Continue reading at NowPublic.com: Rajiv Assasination – Unanswered questions | NowPublic News Coverage http://www.nowpublic.com/world/rajiv-assasination-unanswered-questions#ixzz2Ayg9VI74 

 

People at the helm are protecting Rajiv murder accused’

 

Former Central Bureau of Investigation’s former chief investigating officer K Ragothaman has claimed in a recently published book — Conspiracy to kill Rajiv: From CBI files – that a lot of facts pertaining to the former prime minister’s assassination were either suppressed, or were studiously ignored.

Ragothamam writes that there were attempts made to protect the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam from being called the conspirators behind Rajiv’s killing. In this interview with rediff.com’s Vicky Nanjappa, Ragothaman speaks about the conspiracy and the hurdles that were faced in a probe in which many aspects were hushed up.
How has your book been received?
That is too early to tell. It is just out, but is under debate. Let us wait and watch.
You write that Dravida Munetra Kazhagam chief M Karunanidhi’s [ Images ] scheduled public meeting in Sriperumbudur on May 21, 1991, the day Rajiv was killed, was abruptly cancelled.
Karunanidhi was to address a meeting at 6′O clock that evening, two hours before Rajiv’s meeting. The police had made all arrangements. Then there was a telegram from the Anna Arivalyam postal office jurisdiction that the meeting was cancelled.
I probed the sender of that telegram. I was told to ask Karunanidhi about the same. However, I could not investigate him directly. Later, I was told by my superiors that the matter was being looked into, and I should remain quiet.
I was also told that it was a director general of police, Rangaswamy, who had advised that the meeting be cancelled. However, when I looked at the Rangaswamy affidavit, it read that he had ordered as much police force as possible in view of this meeting.
I also attended the Jain commission inquiry in which Karunanidhi was examined. He had said then that it was the then governor, Bhishma Narayan Singh, who had told him to cancel the meeting. Look at the contradictions.
Who according to you was the one who advised cancellation of the Karunanidhi meeting?
Probably it was Marumalarchi Dravida Munetra Kazhagam leader Vaiko who telephoned and sought cancellation of the meeting. The telephone records needed to be examined, but it was never done.
Why do you think Vaiko tried to stop Karunanidhi?
After Rajiv’s assassination, many DMK workers were attacked, their offices burnt. If Karunanidhi had gone there, he would have been in trouble and there would have been an onslaught. Hence, they were trying to protect him.
Does this mean even Karunanidhi was part of the plot?
No, that is not what I meant. Karunanidhi is not a killer. He wanted a democratic solution to the problem and this was never liked by slain LTTE [ Images ] chief Prabhakaran.
You accuse Vaiko of having a hand in this entire issue.
Vaiko was the one who spoke vehemently against the Indo-Jaffna accord. Vaiko said at that time he was first an LTTE, then a Tamilian and then an Indian. At the time of the accord, Prabhakaran was brought down to New Delhi [ Images ] and was put up at the Hotel Ashoka.
Vaiko sought to meet him, but he was not allowed to do so. He conversed with Prabhakaran on the intercom, during which the latter told him, “Anna, this Rajiv has betrayed me. I feel like committing suicide as he is sealing my fate. But I cannot kill myself as I need to fight for my people.”
Vaiko wrote a book later in which he mentions that Prabakaran had thought of committing suicide.
Tell us more, sir…
When Vaiko had gone to Sri Lanka [ Images ], we had secured a videotape titled Inside a Tiger’s Cave which has him on tape. There he spoke everything that was anti-Rajiv. It appeared that he was more against Rajiv than Prabakaran himself. This was also a point noted during our investigation.
Then there is also a meeting in which Vaiko says that Rajiv won’t go back alive from Tamil Nadu. He, however, retracted that statement. During the investigation, we questioned one Chinna who is on death row.
He said that in one of the hideouts, Sivarasan (the prime accused in the assassination) held talks with one Srinivas Ayya and said that after the successful completion of the mission, they should ensure that Vaiko becomes the chief minister of Tamil Nadu.
Why was the evidence not used then?
This is a question that I have been asking. We had so much evidence, but surprisingly Vaiko was roped in as prosecution witness number 250 in the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities court.
During the trial, he denied speaking all of which was on video with Prabhakaran. The video was played out. He claimed that it was him in the video but the voice was not his. It was sent for examination and the voice too was confirmed, but till date there is no perjury case against him.
You have alleged that even the Intelligence Bureau and the Research and Analysis Wing tried to cover up LTTE’s role?
After the assassination, Chandrashekhar, the then prime minister, convened a meeting in which even Janata Party president Subramanian Swamy (then minister of commerce and industry) was present. The then IB chief, MK Narayanan, and RAW boss, GS Bajpai, were also present.
Swamy said that it was obvious that the LTTE was responsible. Bajpai retorted that it was not the LTTE. The meeting was adjourned. Meanwhile, the CBI director had gone to Colombo for the investigation.
They were called back and rushed to Delhi for the meeting. During the meeting, it was again asked why a trip was made to Colombo and did that mean it was preconceived that it was the LTTE which was behind the assassination.
Bajpai once again opposed this. He even quoted one Kittu to be his source. Kittu, incidentally, was Prabhakaran’s right hand man. An LTTE man could never have been a RAW mole and even Dr Swamy had termed this as absurd.
What are your allegations against Narayanan?
A video taken at the meeting on that ill-fated day in which there were images of Dhanu was never made available to the CBI. The assassination team was waiting for nearly two hours in a sterile area. The original video reached Narayanan.
The government had decided to conduct an investigation in this regard and this case was registered with the Special Investigating Team and the CBI. However, it was buried. My question is, why no action has been taken for suppressing evidence.
It was being said that Dhanu had barged into the meeting, but this video clearly shows that they were waiting for a long time. We probed this case risking our own lives and it does upset me that people sitting at the helm of affairs are protecting the accused.
Do you think the loopholes will be rectified now?
Let us see.

 

Covering up Late PM Rajiv Gandhi Assassination conspiracy & BOFORS SCAM

 

The CBI & GOI is more interested in favoring accused persons , Quattrochi & closing BOFORS Case than punishing the guilty.

The GOI & investigating authorities have failed to punish the real master minds behind the Late Prime minister Shri . Rajiv Gandhi assassination case .
When a responsible Indian citizen volunteered to appear before the supreme court of india as an amicus curie , to give certain information before the court relating to this assassination , he was not at all permitted. Instead he was threatened , attempts made to murder him , his news paper was closed , his jobs were illegally snatched away , police & investigating agencies repeatedly grilled him , THE PURPOSE IS TO SILENCE THAT PERSON . The Police failed to act upon his complaints. The Supreme Court of India Failed to admit his PIL Petitions. ALL TO COVER UP THE POWERS THAT BE .

who are covering-up late p.m. rajiv gandhi assassination case? who are those conspirators? who are trying to silence me?

My sufferings began hand in hand with my crusade. I have raised various issues of social concern from time to time at the appropriate levels, one of those is LATE P.M. RAJIV GANDHI ASASSINATION CASE. where-in only the tools of the conspirator’s were punished where as the conspirators are roaming free. i have raised this topic of inequity , travesty of justice and sought a fair, proper enquiry& trial , at various forums. but to no avail.
the conspirators were disturbed by this and tried to silence me by threatening me, physically assaulting me and even made attempts to murder me. they prevented me from appearing before the JAIN COMMISSION OF ENQUIRY. they even manipulated the recruitment systems to deny me the appointments in R.B.I.CURRENCY NOTE PRESS MYSORE, P.E.S. COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING MANDYA, N.I.E MYSORE , District Court Mysore & Illegally snatched away my job in RPG Cables Ltd , Mysore . they even tried to silence me by forcibly closing down my newspaper publications THE TESTUDO & VOICE OF CRUSADER.
my appeals for justice resulted only in police enquiries. the central intelligence bureau(I.B.) state intelligence & state police personnel enquired me exhaustively number of times, but they never did enquire the powers that be. any way these people don’t have practical powers to enquire such people. the highest constitutional functionaries who can order a proper enquiry, trial are keeping mum inspite of repeated appeals. probably they are acting under the directions of conspirators. thereby they are not only covering up the crime, they are actively sponsoring terrorism , but are also violating my fundamental/human rights & obstructing me from performing my fundamental duties as a citizen of india.

 

……………………..DECLARATION………………………

 

 


N
ame : ………………………NAGARAJA.M.R.


Address : ……………….LIG-2 / 761 , HUDCO FIRST STAGE , OPP
WATER WORKS OFFICE , LAKSHMIKANTANAGAR , HEBBAL , MYSORE – 570017 INDIA

Professional / Trade Title :  S.O.S  e – Voice For Justice

Periodicity : WEEKLY

Circulation : FOR FREE DISTRIBUTION ON WEB

Donations : NOT ACCEPTED.  Self financing . Never accepted any donations , subscriptions either for ourselves or on behalf of other organizations / individuals .

Monetary gains : nil , never made any monetary gain by way of advertisements on my websites or web news paper or otherwise.

Owner/editor/printer/publisher : NAGARAJA.M.R.

Nationality : INDIAN

Body Donation Physical Body of Nagaraja M R , Editor , S.O.S- e – clarion of Dalit &  S.O.S-e-Voice for Justice is donated  to JSS Medical College , Mysore ( Donation No. 167 dated 22 / 10 / 2003 ) , In case of either Unnatural death or Natural Death at the hands of criminal nexus , my body must be  handed over to JSS Medical College , Mysore for the study purposes of  medical students.


Eye Donation Both EYES  of Nagaraja M R , Editor , S.O.S- e – clarion of Dalit &  S.O.S-e-Voice for Justice are donated  to Mysore Eye Bank , Mysore , In case of either Unnatural death or Natural Death at the hands of criminal nexus , my  eyes  must be  handed over to  Mysore Eye Bank  , Mysore  WITHIN 6 Hours  for immediate eye transplantation to the needy.

Home page :  

 http://in.groups.yahoo.com/group/sosevoiceforjustice/ ,  http://groups.google.co.in/group/hrwepaper / ,  http://sites.google.com/site/sosevoiceforjustice / , https://evoiceofhumanrightswatch.wordpress.com / ,  http://naghrw.tripod.com/evoice/  ,  

http://e-voiceofhumanrightswatch.blogspot.com  ,  http://paper.li/f-1368369249



C
ontact naghrw@yahoo.com , nagarajhrw@hotmail.com    ,

 

UID  Aadhaar  No  :  5703  5339  3479 

Cell : 91 9341820313


I ,NAGARAJA.M.R. hereby do declare that information given above are true to the best of my knowledge & belief. If i am repeatedly called to police station or else where for the sake of investigations , the losses i do incurr as a result like loss of wages , transportation , job , etc must be borne by the government. prevoiusly the police / IB personnel repeatedly called me the complainant (sufferer of injustices) to police station for questioning , but never called the guilty culprits even once to police station for questioning , as the culprits are high & mighty . this type of one sided questioning must not be done by police or investigating agencies . if anything untoward happens to me or to my family members like loss of job , meeting with hit & run accidents , loss of lives , death due to improper medical care , etc , the jurisdictional police , revenue officials , District Magistrate  & Chief Justice of India together with above mentioned accused public servants will be responsible for it. Even if criminal nexus levels fake charges ,  police file fake cases against me or my dependents  to silence me , this complaint is & will be effective.

If I or my family members or my dependents are denied our fundamental rights , human rights , denied proper medical care for ourselves , If anything untoward like hit & run cases , murder attempts , unnatural deaths , etc  happens to me or to my dependents   or to my family members    – In such case Chief Justice of  India together with the jurisdictional  revenue & police officials will be responsible for it , in such case the government of india  is liable to pay Rs. TWO  crore as compensation to survivors of my family. if my whole family is eliminated by the criminal nexus ,then that compensation money must be donated to Indian Army Welfare Fund. Afterwards , the money must be recovered by GOI as land arrears from the salary , pension , property , etc of guilty police officials , guilty Judges , guilty public servants &  guilty Constitutional fuctionaries.  

date :   22.02.2014..………………………..Your’s sincerely,

place : India……………………………………Nagaraja.M.R.

 

 

 

 

 

Edited, printed , published owned by NAGARAJA.M.R. @ #LIG-2 / 761,HUDCO FIRST STAGE ,OPP WATER WORKS , LAXMIKANTANAGAR , HEBBAL ,MYSORE – 570017INDIA… cell :09341820313 

home page :   http://in.groups.yahoo.com/group/sosevoiceforjustice/ ,  http://groups.google.co.in/group/hrwepaper/   , http://sites.google.com/site/sosevoiceforjustice/  ,  https://evoiceofhumanrightswatch.wordpress.com/ ,  http://naghrw.tripod.com/evoice/   ,  

http://e-voiceofhumanrightswatch.blogspot.com/   ,  http://paper.li/f-1368369249/

 

Contact  :  naghrw@yahoo.com   , nagarajhrw@hotmail.com  ,

http://www.amnesty.org/en/user/naghrw  

A   Member  of  Amnesty  International   

 

Standard