[Prev] [Next]   [Index]   [Thread Index]

02268: Re: [WDDM] ON THE QUESTION OF TENDERING APPOLOGY BY JUSTICE MARKANDE KAJU AND ALLOWING REVIEW OF THE SUPRE COURT DECISION ON THE INSISTMENT OF A STUDENT TO FOOLLW TELIBAN TYPE APPEARANCE

From: Bruce Eggum <bruce.eggum(at)gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 16 Aug 2009 00:45:19 -0500
Subject: Re: [WDDM] ON THE QUESTION OF TENDERING APPOLOGY BY JUSTICE MARKANDE KAJU AND ALLOWING REVIEW OF THE SUPRE COURT DECISION ON THE INSISTMENT OF A STUDENT TO FOOLLW TELIBAN TYPE APPEARANCE

Religion has no place in a Court of Law. Freedom of and from religion must be enforced and practiced.
This is prime example of religious distraction of democratic principles.
Bruce

Bruce Eggum
Gresham Wisconsin, USA
http://usinitiative.com
http://vote.org/



On Sat, Aug 15, 2009 at 11:30 PM, <yogesh saxena> wrote:

ON THE QUESTION OF TENDERING APPOLOGY BY JUSTICE MARKANDE KAJU AND ALLOWING REVIEW OF THE SUPRE COURT DECISION ON THE INSISTMENT OF A STUDENT TO FOOLLW TELIBAN TYPE APPEARANCE< THE BENCH OUT OF SHEER FEAR FROM THE AGENT OF DEATH HAS RELEASE THE CASE. WHAT HAPPENED TO THE PRESTIGES OF OUR CONSTITUTIONAL COURT _ APERSONNAL OPION -Justices R V Raveendran and Markandeya Katju are having their peculier qualities, which I may narrate accourding to my little experience of my practice for 35 years as an Advocate of Allahabad High Court. Firstly speaking about Justice R V Raveendran, His lordship started criticising the conduct of the Lawyers in general ,especially lawyers hailing from State of Karnataka during a delebration of Sapru Law Institute or some other occasion, to which , I don Remember at present, and said that these advocates give the gurantee to thier litigants, especially to the tanants in rent Control Cases, that they will not allow to get settlement of their cases on the flimsy ground of taken adjournment on ground and other and for this they charge the hand some amoount from litigants. I amongest the audiences, in which all the Judges of Allahabad High Court were sitting and stood up for seeking the comments from hos lordships. I asked that JUSTICE AND LAW DO NOT TALK WITH EACH OTHER ,IS THE FIRST LESSON , I LEARN FROM THE PRECEDENTS, AFTER JOINING AT HIGH COURT IN 1974, BUT RETEAT BACK TO MY FAIMLY AGRICULTURE PROPERTY SUPERVISION , AS I CAN RENDER GOOD SERVICES TO NATION. WHAT SUPREME COURT HAS DONE SO FAR TO REVERSE THE MAXIM OF FOOL'S PARADICES?. The Second Question asked by me THAT WHAT THE SUPREME COURT HAS DONE TO MAKE THE APPLICATION OF MAXIM APPLICABLE IN U.K., FROM WHOM WE IMPORTED OUR LAW AND THEREBY STANDING ON THE CRUTCHES OF THE COUNTRY ALWAYS ENIMICAL TO OUR INTEREST. THE MAXIM "FALSES IN UNO; FALSUS IN OMNI BUS , WHY NOT APPLICABLE IN INDIA?. WHY THE PLEA BARGAINING IS NOT PERMISSIBLE BY THE SUPREME COURT VERDICT IN INDIA?WHY WE ARE UNABLE TO DERIVATE OUR OWN SYSTEM OF GOVERNANCE IN LAST 55 YEARS?. and SO on.AS far AS Justice Markandeya Katju is Concerned, he remain famous for his uttarance against SCHEDULE CASTE , O.B.C. LAWYERS appearing in his COURT in COURT NO. 29. HE was SAYING WHY THESE PERSON ARE PRACTICING AT HIGH COURT. THESE PERSON SHOULD CONDUCT THE bisiness OF sweeper, Milk VENDING and CARPENTER, ADVOCACY IS NOT A PLACE FOR THEM. NOW OUR CHIEF JUSTICE OF INDIA IS BELONGING TO THESE CATEGARY OF CITIZEN. CAN JUSTICE KATJU MAY UTTER THE SIMILAR REMARK AGAINST HIM.ON many TIMES MR. SHANTI SWROOP BHATNAGAR by giving me the example of CHIEF JUSTICE ORGI H MOOTHAM that he appologised to nthe litigant in open COURT. WHY I AM NOT WRITING AGAINST JUSTICE KATJU. ON ONE DAY, JUSTICE KATJU REFUSED TO LISTEN MY ARGUMENT AND WHEN I SIMPLY CITED THE PROVISIONS OF THE U.P.MMC RULES, 1963 to demonstrate that the D.M. has no power to decide the matter as STATE GOVT> THROUGH SECRETARY IS EMPOWERED TO DECIDE IT. HE BECAME SUSPTICAL to MY ARGUMENTS and THREATENED that HE WILL CALL TO COURT MASTER and SEND ME TO JAIL. I COMPLAINED THE MATTER TO SUPREME COURT THROUGH ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE D.S.SINHA, AS CHIEF JUSTICE N.K. mitra WAS on leave and has gone to culcutta. justice katju rushed to ssbhatnagar's residence AND requested him not to refer the matter to supreme court. sri s s bhatnagar called me and directed for not to proceed in the matter.Tthere is also the similar instances OD reprimands to the lawyer by justiceDR. BALVIR SINGH CHAUHAN ALSO AT HIGH COURT ALLAHABAD. MR. S.K.AWAASTHI has not died because of the punishment given by JUSTICE Dr. B>S.CHAHAN sitting with JUSTICE ARUN TONDON , But because of taking revenge BY JUSTICE CHAUHAN COMING TO JUSTICE KATJU AGAIN< he said that AURANGJEB was secular and GURU TEG BAHADUR, CHATRAPATI SHIVA JI and GURU JI DESCIPLES, WHO WERE MERCILESSLY KILLED BY THIS AURANGJEB were Reactionaries. JUSTICE KATJU SAID IT IN THE DELIBERATION PRESIDED BY DR. DWEVEDI in ARCHIOLOGICAL MUSIUM AT CHANDRA SHEKHAR PARK commenly known as ALFERT PARK. I was very much perturbed as The holei Bookof Muslim PREACHES TO KILL INFIDELS HINDUS. THUS THE TERRORISM IS IN OUR GREAT NATION. I MAY ALSO ADD THAT JUSTICE SYAD RAFAT ALAM, WHO WAS ELEVATED AS JUDGE OF ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT FROM AMONGEST @) MUSLIMS JUDGES, HAS REFUSED TO ELEVATED AS CHIEF JUSTICE as may DECIDE THE AYODHYA DIPPUE PERTAINING TO DEMOLITION OF RAM MANDIR, FROM WHICH NUMBER OF IDOLS were RECOVERED WHEN BABARI MASJID WAS DEMOLISHED AS TIDE UP< WHILE HIS LORDSHIP REAL SISTER IN LAWS practicing at DELHI HIGH COURT ANFD SUPREME COURT IS THE MEMBER OF BABRI MASJID DEMOLISITION COMMEETTEE. WHY THE CASE OF RAM JANAM BHUMI IS TIDE UP> DAILY THGE CASES OF CONVERSION OF THE HINDU GIRLS TO THE MUSLIMS FOLD ARE PRESENTED BEFOR MUSLIM JUDGE , WHO ARE ACCEPTING the conversion of these adolence childen to ISLAM , with out knowing that they will face the consequence of their conversion like that of reprimand given by this country to YTASLIMA NASHRIN , butheir MARRIGE With MUSLIM FANATICS are accepted by ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT. WE SHOULD WAKE UP BEFORE WE ARE PERISH FOR EVER. THE ELEVATION PROCESS IS A BARGAINING ANDV THOSE WHO ARE SHEER OPPORTUNISTS AND COMPROMISE WITH THEIR RULING PARTY < WHEREIN A LADY OF ITALIAN ORIGIN BY APPOINTING THEM and TO JUSTICE SANJAY KAUL< GIVING A JUDGEMENT THAT M F HUSSAIN PAINTING SHOWING NUDITY TO TO GODDESS OF HINDUS ARE A PIECE OF ART: AND JUSTICE SHAH , PUTTING A BAREAOR UPON SECTION 377 IPC , WHICH HE CAN NOT DO SO < IN VIEW OF ARTICLE 372 of CONSTITUTION is LEAGALISING HOMOSEXULITY IN THIS COUNTRY. WITH OUT PREJUDICE To OUR SYSTEM OF JUDIAL INSTITUTION < THIS IS MY PERSONAL OPINION ON THE ISSUE.

< THE BENCH OUT OF SHEER FEAR FROM THE AGENT OF DEATH HAS RELEASE THE CASE. WHAT HAPPENED TO THE PRESTIGES OF OUR CONSTITUTIONAL COURT _ APERSONNAL OPION -Justices R V Raveendran and Markandeya Katju are having their peculier qualities, which I may narrate accourding to my little experience of my practice for 35 years as an Advocate of Allahabad High Court. Firstly speaking about Justice R V Raveendran, His lordship started criticising the conduct of the Lawyers in general ,especially lawyers hailing from State of Karnataka during a delebration of Sapru Law Institute or some other occasion, to which , I don Remember at present, and said that these advocates give the gurantee to thier litigants, especially to the tanants in rent Control Cases, that they will not allow to get settlement of their cases on the flimsy ground of taken adjournment on ground and other and for this they charge the hand some amoount from litigants. I amongest the audiences, in which all the Judges of Allahabad High Court were sitting and stood up for seeking the comments from hos lordships. I asked that JUSTICE AND LAW DO NOT TALK WITH EACH OTHER ,IS THE FIRST LESSON , I LEARN FROM THE PRECEDENTS, AFTER JOINING AT HIGH COURT IN 1974, BUT RETEAT BACK TO MY FAIMLY AGRICULTURE PROPERTY SUPERVISION , AS I CAN RENDER GOOD SERVICES TO NATION. WHAT SUPREME COURT HAS DONE SO FAR TO REVERSE THE MAXIM OF FOOL'S PARADICES?. The Second Question asked by me THAT WHAT THE SUPREME COURT HAS DONE TO MAKE THE APPLICATION OF MAXIM APPLICABLE IN U.K., FROM WHOM WE IMPORTED OUR LAW AND THEREBY STANDING ON THE CRUTCHES OF THE COUNTRY ALWAYS ENIMICAL TO OUR INTEREST. THE MAXIM "FALSES IN UNO; FALSUS IN OMNI BUS , WHY NOT APPLICABLE IN INDIA?. WHY THE PLEA BARGAINING IS NOT PERMISSIBLE BY THE SUPREME COURT VERDICT IN INDIA?WHY WE ARE UNABLE TO DERIVATE OUR OWN SYSTEM OF GOVERNANCE IN LAST 55 YEARS?. and SO on.AS far AS Justice Markandeya Katju is Concerned, he remain famous for his uttarance against SCHEDULE CASTE , O.B.C. LAWYERS appearing in his COURT in COURT NO. 29. HE was SAYING WHY THESE PERSON ARE PRACTICING AT HIGH COURT. THESE PERSON SHOULD CONDUCT THE bisiness OF sweeper, Milk VENDING and CARPENTER, ADVOCACY IS NOT A PLACE FOR THEM. NOW OUR CHIEF JUSTICE OF INDIA IS BELONGING TO THESE CATEGARY OF CITIZEN. CAN JUSTICE KATJU MAY UTTER THE SIMILAR REMARK AGAINST HIM.ON many TIMES MR. SHANTI SWROOP BHATNAGAR by giving me the example of CHIEF JUSTICE ORGI H MOOTHAM that he appologised to nthe litigant in open COURT. WHY I AM NOT WRITING AGAINST JUSTICE KATJU. ON ONE DAY, JUSTICE KATJU REFUSED TO LISTEN MY ARGUMENT AND WHEN I SIMPLY CITED THE PROVISIONS OF THE U.P.MMC RULES, 1963 to demonstrate that the D.M. has no power to decide the matter as STATE GOVT> THROUGH SECRETARY IS EMPOWERED TO DECIDE IT. HE BECAME SUSPTICAL to MY ARGUMENTS and THREATENED that HE WILL CALL TO COURT MASTER and SEND ME TO JAIL. I COMPLAINED THE MATTER TO SUPREME COURT THROUGH ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE D.S.SINHA, AS CHIEF JUSTICE N.K. mitra WAS on leave and has gone to culcutta. justice katju rushed to ssbhatnagar's residence AND requested him not to refer the matter to supreme court. sri s s bhatnagar called me and directed for not to proceed in the matter.Tthere is also the similar instances OD reprimands to the lawyer by justiceDR. BALVIR SINGH CHAUHAN ALSO AT HIGH COURT ALLAHABAD. MR. S.K.AWAASTHI has not died because of the punishment given by JUSTICE Dr. B>S.CHAHAN sitting with JUSTICE ARUN TONDON , But because of taking revenge BY JUSTICE CHAUHAN COMING TO JUSTICE KATJU AGAIN< he said that AURANGJEB was secular and GURU TEG BAHADUR, CHATRAPATI SHIVA JI and GURU JI DESCIPLES, WHO WERE MERCILESSLY KILLED BY THIS AURANGJEB were Reactionaries. JUSTICE KATJU SAID IT IN THE DELIBERATION PRESIDED BY DR. DWEVEDI in ARCHIOLOGICAL MUSIUM AT CHANDRA SHEKHAR PARK commenly known as ALFERT PARK. I was very much perturbed as The holei Bookof Muslim PREACHES TO KILL INFIDELS HINDUS. THUS THE TERRORISM IS IN OUR GREAT NATION. I MAY ALSO ADD THAT JUSTICE SYAD RAFAT ALAM, WHO WAS ELEVATED AS JUDGE OF ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT FROM AMONGEST @) MUSLIMS JUDGES, HAS REFUSED TO ELEVATED AS CHIEF JUSTICE as may DECIDE THE AYODHYA DIPPUE PERTAINING TO DEMOLITION OF RAM MANDIR, FROM WHICH NUMBER OF IDOLS were RECOVERED WHEN BABARI MASJID WAS DEMOLISHED AS TIDE UP< WHILE HIS LORDSHIP REAL SISTER IN LAWS practicing at DELHI HIGH COURT ANFD SUPREME COURT IS THE MEMBER OF BABRI MASJID DEMOLISITION COMMEETTEE. WHY THE CASE OF RAM JANAM BHUMI IS TIDE UP> DAILY THGE CASES OF CONVERSION OF THE HINDU GIRLS TO THE MUSLIMS FOLD ARE PRESENTED BEFOR MUSLIM JUDGE , WHO ARE ACCEPTING the conversion of these adolence childen to ISLAM , with out knowing that they will face the consequence of their conversion like that of reprimand given by this country to YTASLIMA NASHRIN , butheir MARRIGE With MUSLIM FANATICS are accepted by ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT. WE SHOULD WAKE UP BEFORE WE ARE PERISH FOR EVER. THE ELEVATION PROCESS IS A BARGAINING ANDV THOSE WHO ARE SHEER OPPORTUNISTS AND COMPROMISE WITH THEIR RULING PARTY < WHEREIN A LADY OF ITALIAN ORIGIN BY APPOINTING THEM and TO JUSTICE SANJAY KAUL< GIVING A JUDGEMENT THAT M F HUSSAIN PAINTING SHOWING NUDITY TO TO GODDESS OF HINDUS ARE A PIECE OF ART: AND JUSTICE SHAH , PUTTING A BAREAOR UPON SECTION 377 IPC , WHICH HE CAN NOT DO SO < IN VIEW OF ARTICLE 372 of CONSTITUTION is LEAGALISING HOMOSEXULITY IN THIS COUNTRY. WITH OUT PREJUDICE To OUR SYSTEM OF JUDIAL INSTITUTION < THIS IS MY PERSONAL OPINION ON THE ISSUE.

-
Y.K.Saxema


[Prev] [Next]   [Index]   [Thread Index]