traffic analytics

Justice is where Judges follow Law-KD Aggarwal. Powered by Blogger.

If Judgments were based on law, every lawyer will get same fees!-KD Aggarwal

Facts and Statute are Not Relevant. They are invented / concealed / amended by corrupt Judges - KD Aggarwal.

Let us make India Corruption free

The matter and inference drawn are based on actual personal experiences of Author. They are meant to serve as beacon to those who may find themselves in similar situations to save themselves from clutches of unscrupulous persons. They are also meant to serve as an eye opener to those men who are sitting at Helm of Affairs for improvement of judicial system and corruption free India, so that never again one says; "the law court is not a cathedral (what they used to be) but a casino where so much depends on the throw of the dice (and money). K R Narayanan http://www.krnarayanan.in/html/speeches/others/jan28_00.htm

Transparency improves Accountability

Every Judge is Public Servant and thus accountable for his acts. Transparency of Complaints against Judges and instant stringent action for perjury and violation of their oath will improve Dignity of Courts and Justice delivery.

Friday, March 1, 2013

Is J Rajive Bhalla High Court Chandigarh on payroll of D P Ojha official Liquidator?


My Complaint against high Court Judge;
Click here for Oath Taken by J Rajive Bhalla. High Court Chandigarh.

On 31st of May we all read in The tribune an incident wherein a litigant got in court room of Rajive Bhalla, Judge and made a statement regarding graft / corruption. The gentleman was client of Mr Sisodia a known lawyer of fair standing at the bar. The Litigant said in open Court that he had paid 34 lacs to his lawyer for onward payment to Judge for favorable order. This was 3rd known incident in Court room of Justice Rajive Bhalla.  http://www.tribuneindia.com/2012/20120531/punjab.htm#19

There was another incident in early 2011, wherein another litigant had got up in court room of Rajive Bhalla, Judge and made a statement about graft / corruption. He also said that He had paid lacs of Rupees to his lawyer for onward payment to judge for favorable order and if amount was less he can pay more. The gentleman was client of Mr Ahluwalia a known lawyer of fair standing at the bar.

The incident published in “The Tribune” on 31st may was in fact 3rd known incident involving Rajive Bhalla, Judge High Court. 2nd incident is reproduced below by way of the text of Judicial record involving Rajive Bhalla, Judge where  he was asked to recuse himself from a matter and he was told not to accept briefs in his chambers. Any one can obtain certified copy of Company Application 167 of 2011 decided on 1.4.2011 text of which is Click Here.


In exercise of right to make complaint against a Judge granted by 

A. Section 3(2) of Judges Protection Act, 

B. Rule 1(1) of Advocates duty to Court (Uphold dignity of court by pointing out a delinquent Judge).

C. In-House Mechanism by H Supreme Court of India to transfer delinquent Judge.

D. Reasons behind Judges Accountability Bill.

E. Letter Dt 27-5-2011 by Ministry of law and Justice.
Following is part of Public records.

To,                                             Date; 07.4.2012

The Chief Justice of India and Brother Judges
Of Supreme Court of India,
New Delhi.

SUB;         Request for Transfer of Justice Rajive Bhalla of Punjab & Haryana High Court.


Respectfully Showeth;

1.     It is common knowledge that official Liquidators attached with High Courts hold hundreds of Crores of unaccounted assets, which actually vest with High Courts under Section 456(2) of Companies Act. I say unaccounted as neither the High Court nor the Ministry has any inventory or any valuation of these assets. Copy of letter No 307 Dt 21.02.2012 received from Punjab and Haryana High Court is attached herewith as Annexure C/1. Similarly letter No 7757 Dt 02.03.2012 received from Government of India, Ministry of Corporate affairs is attached herewith as Annexure C/2.

2.     At the time of sale ‘block of assets’ are mentioned and what has been embezzled or diverted for personal use is anyone’s guess. Official liquidators are always on the lookout for judges who are willing to share such loot with them. If any relative of a Judge or even a Judge himself wants any property from the Official Liquidator, then Official Liquidators are a game for giving such property to relative of a Judge or even Judge himself in exchange for increasing their own loot. Hence while appointing Company judges, utmost care has to be exercised.

3.     Justice Rajive Bhalla, who was company Judge from 1.1.2011 to 31.5.2011 has been favoring D P Ojha, Official Liquidator Chandigarh. The actual reasons are known to only Justice Rajive Bhalla and D P Ojha. What we hear in the Bar or from office of official Liquidator for the actual reasons or actual amount of money involved is a Hearsay. D P Ojha says that he owns Justice Rajive Bhalla and that present company Judge Justice Surya Kant is obliged to him.

4.     As part of my crusade against corruption, I had filed complaint against D P Ojha official Liquidator under prevention of corruption Act with Ministry of corporate affairs vide my complaint Dt 22.11.2010 and 07.1.2011 Annexure C/3. To get documentary evidence I had also been making applications under RTI.  On 11.3.2011, Justice Rajive Bhalla asked me to withdraw my complaints under prevention of corruption Act against D P Ojha Official Liquidator. He threatened me in open court and said he will finish my career, he file ask bar council to remove me as a lawyer, he will dismiss all my cases. He will see to it that no judge decides my cases as per law and all my clients cases will also be dismissed if I do not withdraw all my complaints of corruption under prevention of corruption Act against D P Ojha, Official Liquidator. He also threatened to institute Criminal contempt of Court proceedings against me. He also specifically told me to withdraw my complaint under prevention of corruption Act regarding embezzlement of Rs 1.00 crores which was payment towards 41 employees claimed by Industrial security agency of J S Kahaan out of whom 38 have never been born (See Proof). His conduct left no manner of doubt of his collusion and criminal nexus with D P Ojha and/or M L Sharma/J S Kahaan. Any person will also believe that DP Ojha/ML Sharma had met Justice Rajive Bhalla in Chambers and had a secret deal behind closed doors to make illegal payment of Rs 1.00 crores to industrial Security agency.

Section 16 of Contempt of Courts Act states as under;-
5.     “16. Contempt by judge, magistrate or other person acting judicially.

(1) Subject to the provisions of any law for the time being in force, a judge, magistrate or other person acting judicially shall also be liable for contempt of his own court or of any other court in the same manner as any other individual is liable and the provisions of this Act shall, so far as may be, apply accordingly

6.     He threatened me in open court and said he will finish my career, he file ask bar council to remove me as a lawyer, he will dismiss all my cases. He will see to it that no judge decides my cases as per law and all my clients cases will also be dismissed if I do not withdraw all my complaints of corruption under prevention of corruption Act against D P Ojha, Official Liquidator. He also threatened to institute Criminal contempt of Court proceedings against me. He also specifically told me to withdraw my complaint under prevention of corruption Act regarding embezzlement of Rs 1.00 crores which was payment towards 41 employees claimed by Industrial security agency of J S Kahaan out of whom 38 have never been born (See Proof). His conduct left no manner of doubt of his collusion and criminal nexus with D P Ojha and/or M L Sharma/J S Kahaan. He abused the High court by giving threats from the chair of a High Court Judge while holding court and also misused his official position to promote embezelement of public funds in the name of never born persons. His thus committed criminal contempt of his own court within the meaning of section 16 (supra).

7.     Justice Rajive Bhalla used street language, abuses and gave me verbal threats for filing complaints against D P Ojha, Official Liquidator on following issues.

A.     Sh D P Ojha official Liquidator, an employee of O/O Ministry of corporate affairs in league with Sh M L Sharma Middleman and Sh J S Kahaan was going to release a sum of Rs 1.00 crores to J S Kahaan on the basis of alleged payment to 41 workers 90% of whom have never been born. A letter in this respect was filed with Official Liquidator and PSIDC on 20.11.2010 followed with another letter with documents on 7.1.2011

B.     Sh D P Ojha was trying to buy property of Him Ispat by wrongly undervaluing the area as 3 acres instead of actual area of 6 acres for which I had written letter under RTI. High Court of HP was timely informed of the above fact and High Court of HP has ordered re advertisement.

D.     letters written regarding excess payments to certain persons not approved by High Court.

E.     I had referred above matters to Regional Director, Ministry of Corporate Affairs NOIDA and Ministry, administrative heads of SH D P Ojha vide my letters Dt 12.2.2011.

F.      There is CBI chargesheet against D P Ojha in the matter of Arihant Cotsyn Ltd for embezzlement of funds pending at New Delhi.

8.     ‘Justice’ Rajive Bhalla acted as agent / employee of D P Ojha, liquidator and wanted me to withdraw complaints of corruption against him and also wanted to falsely record that I have withdrawn the said complaints and will not make any application under RTI.  Order sheet merely states “Notice to OL for 16.3.2011”. However abuses and verbal threats against me were given orally.

9.     In his earlier tenure also as company judge, Justice Rajiv Bhalla in matter of IFCI VS AVI Autos, had deliberately recorded incorrect statement of Sh Gurnam Singh to give pecuniary advantage to D P Ojha, Justice Rajiv Bhalla summoned Gurnam Singh to court and then proceeded to record his statement without referring to Gurnam Singh though Sh Gurnam had rather made totally opposite statement.

10.    In view of above facts and to avoid repeat of what happened in “IFCI VS AVI Autos” neither me nor my counsel went to the court on 16.3.2011 but filed Company Misc Application 167 of 2011 stating all the above averments as made herein above. I requested Justice Rajiv Bhalla to recuse himself from hearing the case. I also stated that it is not appropriate for a sitting High Court Judge to start accepting private briefs of private parties by meeting them in Chambers. It was interalia stated as under;-

“Industrial security is very rich company based on its ‘connections’ and have sufficient resources and can hire most competent advocates who are ‘officially advocates’ ”.
“The reply is being filed to put the record straight as lies have been told to Sh Rajiv Bhalla in chambers by vested interests. Mr Justice Rajiv Bhalla has made uncalled for comments, has used intemperate/ abusive language / gave verbal threats against applicant and has shown extreme bias and prejudice against the applicant and in favor of respondent D P Ojha based on lies told to him in Chambers by Sh D P Ojha and has asked me to appear before him on 16-3-2011.”

Contents of written submissions filed before Justice Rajiv Bhalla on judicial side be treated as part of this information. Copy is attached as Annexure C/3.

11.    My application containing averments of corruption against Justice Rajive Bhalla came up before Justice Rajiv Bhalla on 16.3.2011. Record shows that Justice Rajiv Bhalla did not deny any of the averments made against him in the Misc Application 167 of 2011 when it came up before him on 16.3.2011. He simply adjourned the matter to 1st April 2011 on which date he went on leave (conveniently). Justice Rajiv Bhalla could not possibly deny the abuses, threats intemperate, street language that he is used in open court without being called a liar and / or losing face.

12.    The same day I had endorsed a complaint to the Hon’ble the Chief Justice High Court vide my letter Dt March 14th 2011. Copy is Annexure C/4.

13.    Justice Rajiv Bhalla is favoring rich and corrupt persons and by his conduct, he is not fit to be a Judge. Throughout his tenure, 2011 (I did not go to his court thereafter), he has openly and constantly abusing Sh Anna Hazare and people of this country who wanted Jan Lok Pal and were seeking accountability of people holding public offices including Judicial accountability. It is obvious why Rajive Bhalla does not want a Jan Lok Pal or / and be accountable to society. He is openly abusing his chair, the court room where he sits and is guilty of contempt of court under section 16 of the Contempt of courts Act.

14.    I had earlier filed a similar complaint before this court vide my letter Dt 20.2.2012. However the same lacked material particulars. Hence this complaint with better particulars.

It is therefore respectfully Prayed that ;-

1.     Justice Rajive Bhalla, Judge Punjab and Haryana High Court be transferred out of said high Court in the interests of of Judiciary.

2.     Proceedings in high Courts be monitored by CCTV Cameras / electronically recorded so that Courts may not become places of terror or intimidation. If what Justice Rajive Bhalla said in open court was broadcast in media, I do not think he will ever be employed anywhere.

                                             K D Aggarwal,
                                             Advocate
Encl;

C-1.  Letter No 307 Dated 21.02.2012 by Punjab and Haryana High Court.
C-2   Letter No 7757 Dated 02.03.2012 by ministry of Corporate Affairs.
C-3   Copy of CA 167 / 2011 filed before Justice Rajive Bhalla.
C-4   Copy of letter Dated 14.03.2011 to Chief Justice.

                                                  K D Aggarwal,
                                                  Advocate

Supreme Court of India, New Delhi


In the matter of ;

Transfer of Justice Rajiv Bhalla of Punjab and Haryana High Court.

Affidavit of Kapil Dev Aggarwal, advocate, S/O Sh Raj Kumar Aggarwal, age 48 years resident of 1366, sector 40-B, Chandigarh
I the above named deponent do solemnly affirm and declare;-

1.     It is common knowledge that official Liquidators attached with High Courts hold hundreds of Crores of unaccounted assets, which actually vest with High Courts under Section 456(2) of Companies Act. I say unaccounted as neither the High Court nor the Ministry has any inventory or any valuation of these assets. Copy of letter No 307 Dt 21.02.2012 received from Punjab and Haryana High Court is attached herewith as Annexure C/1. Similarly letter No 7757 Dt 02.03.2012 received from Government of India, Ministry of Corporate affairs is attached herewith as Annexure C/2.

2.     At the time of sale ‘block of assets’ are mentioned and what has been embezzled or diverted for personal use is anyone’s guess. Official liquidators are always on the lookout for judges who are willing to share such loot with them. If any relative of a Judge or even a Judge himself wants any property from the Official Liquidator, then Official Liquidators are a game for giving such property to relative of a Judge or even Judge himself in exchange for increasing their own loot. Hence while appointing Company judges, utmost care has to be exercised.

3.     Justice Rajive Bhalla, who was company Judge from 1.1.2011 to 31.5.2011 has been favoring D P Ojha, Official Liquidator Chandigarh. The actual reasons are known to only Justice Rajive Bhalla and D P Ojha. What we hear in the Bar or from office of official Liquidator for the actual reasons or actual amount of money involved is a Hearsay. D P Ojha says that he owns Justice Rajive Bhalla and that present company Judge Justice Surya Kant is obliged to him.

4.     As part of my crusade against corruption, I had filed complaint against D P Ojha official Liquidator under prevention of corruption Act with Ministry of corporate affairs vide my complaint Dt 22.11.2010 and 07.1.2011 Annexure C/3. To get documentary evidence I had also been making applications under RTI.  On 11.3.2011, Justice Rajive Bhalla asked me to withdraw my complaints under prevention of corruption Act against D P Ojha Official Liquidator. He threatened me in open court and said he will finish my career, he file ask bar council to remove me as a lawyer, he will dismiss all my cases. He will see to it that no judge decides my cases as per law and all my clients cases will also be dismissed if I do not withdraw all my complaints of corruption under prevention of corruption Act against D P Ojha, Official Liquidator. He also threatened to institute Criminal contempt of Court proceedings against me. He also specifically told me to withdraw my complaint under prevention of corruption Act regarding embezzlement of Rs 1.00 crores which was payment towards 41 employees claimed by Industrial security agency of J S Kahaan out of whom 38 have never been born. His conduct left no manner of doubt of his collusion and criminal nexus with D P Ojha and/or M L Sharma/J S Kahaan. Any person will also believe that DP Ojha/ML Sharma had met Justice Rajive Bhalla in Chambers and had a secret deal behind closed doors to make illegal payment of Rs 1.00 crores to industrial Security agency.

Section 16 of Contempt of Courts Act states as under;-
5.     “16. Contempt by judge, magistrate or other person acting judicially.

(1) Subject to the provisions of any law for the time being in force, a judge, magistrate or other person acting judicially shall also be liable for contempt of his own court or of any other court in the same manner as any other individual is liable and the provisions of this Act shall, so far as may be, apply accordingly

6.     He threatened me in open court and said he will finish my career, he file ask bar council to remove me as a lawyer, he will dismiss all my cases. He will see to it that no judge decides my cases as per law and all my clients cases will also be dismissed if I do not withdraw all my complaints of corruption under prevention of corruption Act against D P Ojha, Official Liquidator. He also threatened to institute Criminal contempt of Court proceedings against me. He also specifically told me to withdraw my complaint under prevention of corruption Act regarding embezzlement of Rs 1.00 crores which was payment towards 41 employees claimed by Industrial security agency of J S Kahaan out of whom 38 have never been born. His conduct left no manner of doubt of his collusion and criminal nexus with D P Ojha and/or M L Sharma/J S Kahaan. He abused the High court by giving threats from the chair of a High Court Judge while holding court and also misused his official position to promote embezelement of public funds in the name of never born persons. His thus committed criminal contempt of his own court within the meaning of section 16 (supra).

7.     Justice Rajive Bhalla used street language, abuses and gave me verbal threats for filing complaints against D P Ojha, Official Liquidator on following issues.

A.     Sh D P Ojha official Liquidator, an employee of O/O Ministry of corporate affairs in league with Sh M L Sharma Middleman and Sh J S Kahaan was going to release a sum of Rs 1.00 crores to J S Kahaan on the basis of alleged payment to 41 workers 90% of whom have never been born. A letter in this respect was filed with Official Liquidator and PSIDC on 20.11.2010 followed with another letter with documents on 7.1.2011

B.     Sh D P Ojha was trying to buy property of Him Ispat by wrongly undervaluing the area as 3 acres instead of actual area of 6 acres for which I had written letter under RTI. High Court of HP was timely informed of the above fact and High Court of HP has ordered re advertisement.

D.     letters written regarding excess payments to certain persons not approved by High Court.

E.     I had referred above matters to Regional Director, Ministry of Corporate Affairs NOIDA and Ministry, administrative heads of SH D P Ojha vide my letters Dt 12.2.2011.

F.      There is CBI chargesheet against D P Ojha in the matter of Arihant Cotsyn Ltd for embezzlement of funds pending at New Delhi.

8.     ‘Justice’ Rajive Bhalla acted as agent / employee of D P Ojha, liquidator and wanted me to withdraw complaints of corruption against him and also wanted to falsely record that I have withdrawn the said complaints and will not make any application under RTI.  Order sheet merely states “Notice to OL for 16.3.2011”. However abuses and verbal threats against me were given orally.

9.     In his earlier tenure also as company judge, Justice Rajiv Bhalla in matter of IFCI VS AVI Autos, had deliberately recorded incorrect statement of Sh Gurnam Singh to give pecuniary advantage to D P Ojha, Justice Rajiv Bhalla summoned Gurnam Singh to court and then proceeded to record his statement without referring to Gurnam Singh though Sh Gurnam had rather made totally opposite statement.

10.    In view of above facts and to avoid repeat of what happened in “IFCI VS AVI Autos” neither me nor my counsel went to the court on 16.3.2011 but filed Company Misc Application 167 of 2011 stating all the above averments as made herein above. I requested Justice Rajiv Bhalla to recuse himself from hearing the case. I also stated that it is not appropriate for a sitting High Court Judge to start accepting private briefs of private parties by meeting them in Chambers. It was interalia stated as under;-

“Industrial security is very rich company based on its ‘connections’ and have sufficient resources and can hire most competent advocates who are ‘officially advocates’ ”.
“The reply is being filed to put the record straight as lies have been told to Sh Rajiv Bhalla in chambers by vested interests. Mr Justice Rajiv Bhalla has made uncalled for comments, has used intemperate/ abusive language / gave verbal threats against applicant and has shown extreme bias and prejudice against the applicant and in favor of respondent D P Ojha based on lies told to him in Chambers by Sh D P Ojha and has asked me to appear before him on 16-3-2011.”

Contents of written submissions filed before Justice Rajiv Bhalla on judicial side be treated as part of this information. Copy is attached as Annexure C/3.

11.    My application containing averments of corruption against Justice Rajive Bhalla came up before Justice Rajiv Bhalla on 16.3.2011. Record shows that Justice Rajiv Bhalla did not deny any of the averments made against him in the Misc Application 167 of 2011 when it came up before him on 16.3.2011. He simply adjourned the matter to 1st April 2011 on which date he went on leave (conveniently). Justice Rajiv Bhalla could not possibly deny the abuses, threats intemperate, street language that he is used in open court without being called a liar and / or losing face.

12.    The same day I had endorsed a complaint to the Hon’ble the Chief Justice High Court vide my letter Dt March 14th 2011. Copy is Annexure C/4.

13.    Justice Rajiv Bhalla is favoring rich and corrupt persons and by his conduct, he is not fit to be a Judge. Throughout his tenure, 2011 (I did not go to his court thereafter), he has openly and constantly abusing Sh Anna Hazare and people of this country who wanted Jan Lok Pal and were seeking accountability of people holding public offices including Judicial accountability. It is obvious why Rajive Bhalla does not want a Jan Lok Pal or / and be accountable to society. He is openly abusing his chair, the court room where he sits and is guilty of contempt of court under section 16 of the Contempt of courts Act.

14.    I had earlier filed a similar complaint before this court vide my letter Dt 20.2.2012. However the same lacked material particulars. Hence this complaint with better particulars.

Date 07.04.2012
Chandigarh                                       Deponent
Verification;
Verified that contents of above para are true to my knowledge and belief. No part
is false and nothing material is concealed herein.
Date 07.04.2012
Chandigarh                                        Deponent



18 comments:

  1. Corrupt judges can be handled ONLY by way of very very bold initiatives. However, there will always be confusion in public minds about the controversy involving means and ends. Can means justify the ends ? Or do we need to follow the theory of purity of means for achieving pure ends? Without naming any particular Hon'ble Judge, it has become evident that everyday's complaint against judiciary has made the system unworkable. We need to find an alternative.

    In the words of JP, if the wall is not straight, we need to demolish and continue the process till the end is achieved. But, then, for how long the things will remain clean? Perhaps, it is for the gen-next to find a solution.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. till the system changes, we have to keep on and not rest till end is achieved. Complaints have to be filed to weed out the black sheep to keep the system pure.

      Delete
    2. I agree. Not only the aggrieved person should file a complaint to higher authorities, but the matter should be pursued to its logical end. However, one should be cautious not to cross the boundary line between a 'complaint' and a 'defamatory statement'. Secondly, the complaint should not be made public unless decided by competent authority. In the present case, in my opinion, the transfer application filed before the Hon'ble Supreme Court should not have been posted on the net till it was decided. All the more, if the transfer application has been dismissed or is still pending, its publication may amount to contempt / defamation. Even if aggrieved, one need to abide by the norms.

      Delete
    3. I do not agree. Everyone has a right to highlight corruption whether aggrieved or not. Corruption is heightened when complaints and evidence of corruption is pushed under a carpet which only tends to increase corruption. Every Judge takes salary from public and every public servant without exception is accountable to public. Unless there is a transparent method whereby cases of corruption are made public, the only alternative is to make complaints public so that public can be made aware of corrupt public servants whose names are otherwise hidden which only promotes corruption. people have a right to Truth. In the matter of Justice rajive Bhalla an order was passed by him as company Judge to favor of DP Ojha and ML Sharma on 1.8.2008 and immediately Company roster was changed on 4.8.2008 when he was removed as Company Judge. Why is he still a Judge and playing with public money. I was not even the complainant in that case but whole High Court knows about it. For a just society to exist, corruption has to be highlighted. Truth is a defense in criminal contempt and for Truth to establish both the accused and complainant has to suffer cross examination. let the TRUTH prevail. Judges cannot judge themselves, Nemo iudex in causa sua. As you originally said Corrupt judges can be handled ONLY by way of very very bold initiatives. This is one of them.

      Delete
    4. You are a crusader. I sincerely admire your commitment to fight corruption even if we disagree on the modalities.

      Congratulations on being appointed as AAP-Chandigarh convener and wishing you all the best.

      Delete
  2. Good and wonderful work Mr. K.D. Aggarwal.

    ReplyDelete
  3. how can one innocent person can get justice in rajeev bhalla court. why supreme court is mum not taking any step against him.

    ReplyDelete
  4. he is thinking himself God .us di lathee ch awaaz nahe.why our courts r not pro public.they r hanging innocent people. with one decision the whole family suffer. 90percent innocent people r affected.he is putting stemps of criminals on them.God can punish him

    ReplyDelete
  5. is there no law to punish this corrupt judge.without paying money how can get justice . it try to avoid approaching courts. better to settle the issue outside ,while pronouncing judement they tilt the situation as per their brain.is their supreme court is sleeping. pl take action against this corrupt judge . otherwise people will loose their faith.

    ReplyDelete
  6. everyone is equal before law. but this is not in bhalla court.For one F.I.R same duties same evidences.everything same ,one person is acquited .but he covicted other.even he did not gave time to appproach supreme court.shocking .unbearable for that innocent person.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Very strange supreme court is mum.Not taking any step against this corrupt judge. How can one expect justice from this judge .Is supreme court is not aware of these things.What one can do for this, Iappreciate Mr aggarwal for his courage.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Mr aggarwal u did a gud job by exposing this corrupt judge. But there is no result. Only effected persons can feel. I think nobody wants to take action agaist him.The sufferers are at the mercy of God.Public is talking silently,but helpless.It is a request to high authorites to take it seriously and should took stern action agaist him 'Thanx

    ReplyDelete
  9. why not this complaint exposed to media.Only media can do miracle.we r powerless.Nobody can listen our voice.He only give good decisions where he has some interest. Other wise his decisions r based on presumsion.public is bearing the heat.

    ReplyDelete
  10. whenever i told someone abt this complaint. Even advocate doesnot aware of this .They feel bad .pl do something else to expose it ,sothat maximum people came to know abt this.

    ReplyDelete
  11. mr rajeev bhalla convicted my husband .indecision he is writing testation of copies should be done from registers. is it possible, attesstation is always from original copies.original copies it self is document,what a intelligent decision .

    ReplyDelete
  12. why not u forward all this to law manister. He is v intelligent. He must take stern action against him.

    ReplyDelete
  13. I salute such bold and courageous people. We need more crusaders like Agarwalji.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Hi Sir,

    we are also victamized by Section judge in Tehsil Bahadurgarh,District Jhajjar Harayana.

    we need your Help.

    plz share your Contact Details.

    regards,

    Amit

    9466468341
    9654021968

    amitkumar12683@gmail.com

    ReplyDelete