Sunil chaudhary Registrar Judicial High Court, bonded labor

To,                                                                Date; May 14, 2015

Acting Chief Justice,

Punjab and Haryana high Court

Through Its Registrar General,

Sub; Satyemev Jayate / Duty to uphold Truth and Law

Does it apply to Sh Sunil Chowdhary- Registrar Judicial?

Sir,

1.     Vide letter Dt 2387 Dt 13.9.2012, (copy enclosed as A), Sh Sunil Choudhary declined me inspection of COCP 2085/2011 (re-num. CP 53/12) on the ground that I am a stranger. The order was in violation of Rule 3 of Vol 5 Ch V-A of High Court rules and Orders under which a stranger can inspect any file with permission of court and I had applied permission under rule 3. The case pertained to false claim of Rs 1.5 crores in name of persons never been born. Copy of enquiry report is enclosed as B. A perusal of COCP 2085/11 (CP 53/12) would reveal that my name is mentioned in Para 13, 14, 15 of CP 53/12 and Para 19, 20, 21, 25, 30, 32 of reply. My letters are annexed by both the parties. Being a stranger I was entitled to inspection with permission though I am no stranger to the case. Violation of rule 3 by Sh Sunil Choudhary was with intent to commit/ facilitate/encourage fraud by J Suryakant in ordering payments in name of persons who have never been born in all other cases. J Surya kant passed two orders on 11.1.2012 in COCP 2085/11(CP 53/12) which are not bonafide. Scam was prevented in this case, only because, I was following this matter closely which is listed today.

2.     Vide order Dt 22.4.2015 (copy enclosed) Sh Sunil Choudhary declined copy of letter Dt 6.5.05 on the ground that I am a stranger to the case. The order is in violation of Rule 2 (iii) of Vol 5 Ch V-B of High Court rules and Orders. The letter by Chief justice B K Roy related to post script order of J Surya Kant dt 14.2.05 in CWP 6916/04. The request of its placement on judicial record and order of the then H’ CJ to place it on judicial record was with object that its certified copy can be obtained u/r 2iii being related to orders passed in above case. The case related to challenge of govt. allotment of 5.86 acres of land @ Rs 900 sq yards whereas three years to this allotment adjacent land was allotted to Bar Council of India @ Rs 5,800 per sq yards. 2 sons of a judge were prime stakeholders of allottee. Violation of rule 2iii by Sh Sunil Choudhary was with intent to hide / facilitate/encourage fraud by J Suryakant of passing orders favoring kith and kin of judges.                                             

3.     I may before concluding add that I have no personal grudge against Sh Sunil Choudhary and nor his illegal denials affected me in any manner. I inspected paperbook of COCP 2085/11 (CP53/12) from a colleague and orders are on website. J Surya Kant himself admitted in open court on 2.5.2012 that he had passed two orders on 11.1.2012 in above case. The letter Dt 6.5.2005 of Chief Justice [retd] is available with several advocates, journalists, social media and internet. Copy of the same is enclosed herewith. It was also published in newspapers and can be seen at following link;

http://archive.tehelka.com/story_main12.asp?filename=ts061105Judgement_after.asp

4.     The only purpose of this letter is that public servants and particularly those associated with High Court should not do anything illegal at asking of someone or even otherwise and nor should they consider any individual as their master. Their master and employer is the society. Their duty is to uphold the constitution and the Laws; same as any other employee. They should not become accessory to a crime or fraud by any other employee even if he is a Judge. World can become a better place if we do our duty honestly like Salman khan’s body guard who till his last breath confirmed that Salman was driving the car and he was drunk. He realized that duty of his job is to protect his employer from outside attack but not to shield him if he does a crime. The world needs more such persons.

Hence this letter that law requires some action against Sunil Choudhary that can convey a message to all employees of high Court that their duty is to uphold the constitution and the laws and not to shield any other employee if he commits a crime even if he is a judge.

For information and necessary action.

In service of nation,

KD Aggarwal

is CJ of Chandigarh HC helpless?

To,                                                                    Date; 14.1.2016

The Acting Chief Justice,

Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh.

Sub; 1. RTI Appeal Dt 6.6.05 against order of PIO No 929 Dt 29.5.15.

2. Administrative appeal Dt 6.6.05 against order of Registrar(J) Dt 22.4.15

       

Sir,

An Assistant Registrar once told me; “Sir, Our lives are no different than animals. Animals also have food and shelter, they also bear children and they also die when their time comes. Only thing which distinguishes us from animals is having principals in Life. For the fear of losing jobs, our life has become like that of animals, we are afraid to speak truth. You are the only one I have come across who is standing up for truth and law.”

 Is it imposible for public servants to live by morals and principals? I think not. Roxna Swamy, recalled in an e-mail that "in the early 50s an American journalist interviewing Nehru expressed a desire to see the floods in Bihar from the air. Nehru, always with an eye for a comely white woman, assured her he would make her wish come true. Accordingly, he ordered the Defence Ministry to make a plane available to the lady. The file came to my father, a joint secretary, with a proper respect for the nation's property... A stickler for rules, my father turned down the oral requirement of the PM. An indignant Nehru hauled up my father's superior, H.M. Patel, and demanded to know who had the temerity to disobey him. He ordered the errant officer to be hauled up before him... My father presented himself before Nehru, who gave him a long lecture on India and freedom and the need for sacrifice for the country and demanded that my father sign the requisition.

"'Give to me in writing', said my father. Whereupon Nehru treated him to further abuse of which the least offensive was that he was 'a hidebound bureaucrat'. More abuse followed but Nehru did not give the requisition in writing. The American lady was disappointed... My father was sent to the boondocks with a reputation for being difficult..."

Her father, the late J.D. Kapadia, was an ICS officer, who had served as the collector of Mumbai and Ahmedabad in the 1950s. Though senior-most, he was denied the post of Chief Secretary of the state of Gujarat because of his deserved reputation for being a stickler for rules. He took premature retirement and pursued his academic interests till his death.

The moral of the story to convey is simple. These days when asked to bend, Registrars begin to crawl. All for private gains. This should stop if the dignity of Judiciary is to improve. Registrars are backbone of Judiciary.

Now coming to the matter in question, both the above appeals are pending since long. If one was not to decide RTI appeal than the same could have been sent to concerned person. The appeal was filed with H’ Chief Justice as Registrar Admn being subordinate to J Surya kant would crawl rather than give documents concerning Controversial J Suryakant and there are a whole bundles of controversial documents about him.

 Matter comes under administrative review / appeal since as per information given later by PIO high Court vide his letter No 1411 DT 19.8.2015. Correspondence by Judges and orders of judges on administrative side on judicial file are judicial records copies of which are available to strangers on judicial side under rule ii) and iii) of Vol 5, Ch V-B.

 You are requested to take an early decision to grant certified copy of judicial records i.e. letter Dt 6.5.2005 by Chief Justice (retd) BK Roy to Chief Justice D K Jain of this court and order Dt 6.5.05 of Chief Justice D K Jain thereon. Vide letter Dt 6.5.2005, Chief Justice (retd) B K Roy has made complaint against J Suryakant for fabrication judicial orders of this court. It says that an order which he had passed jointly with Justice Surya kant was suo moto changed by later at a later date which is ante dated as it was not there on the file when order was pronounced in court. Firstly writ was allowed and by changed order by J Surya kant the writ was held not maintainable. (Copy enclosed).  

                                                                        In service of nation,

 

                                                                        KD Aggarwal

Death Penalty a deterrence to Crime.

Death penalty is standard methodology to control crime in communist countries where it is carried out in thousands every year and Muslim countries where it is carried out in hundreds every year.  Crime in these countries is much less as compared to countries which are not executing anyone for heinous crimes.

Rank	Country	Number executed in 2013
1.	People's Republic of China	2,400 (estimate, official number not released)
2	North Korea	xx,xxxs official number not released.
3	Iran	369+
4	Iraq	169+
5	Saudi Arabia	79+
6	United States	39
7	Somalia	34+
8	Sudan	21+
9	Yemen	13+
10	Japan	8
11	Vietnam	7+
12	Republic of China (Taiwan)	6
13	Indonesia	5
14	Kuwait	5
15	South Sudan	4+
16	Nigeria	4
17	Palestine	3
18	Malaysia	2+
19	Afghanistan	2

 20     Bangladesh                       2

Source Wiki

Countries with highest crime rates; WORLD TOP 10: (According to Total persons brought into formal contact with the police and/or criminal justice system, all crimes)

Rank	Country	2013
1	United States of America	7,24,149
2	Brazil	6,61,494
3	Germany	5,06,616
4	India	3,34,669
5	United Kingdom (England and Wales)	3,21,339
6	Mexico*	2,11,714
7	France	1,92,643
8	Colombia	82,940
9	Sweden	80,374
10	Belgium	68,961

An exception apart, people are not given death penalty in above countries.

Source. 

Top 10 Countries with lowest Murder Rate in the World 2013

Rank	Country Name	Murder Rate
1	Liechtenstein	0.001
2	Monaco	0.002
3	Singapore	0.189
4	Japan	0.264
5	Iceland	0.373
6	Hong Kong	0.395
7	Kuwait	0.434
8	French Polynesia	0.475
9	Bahrain	0.547
10	Indonesia	0.638

Source 

Countries with low crime rates are those having death penalty, low numbers of Zionists, Communists or Muslims,  low population and higher standard of education and living.

Who opposes death penalty?

Criminals, Zionists, Communists@fascists and Muslims. In Islamic and communist countries, people are executed by hundreds and thousands. The opposition is only in those countries not ruled by them. only logical explanation is that Muslims and communists fear death penalty and that also explains why death penalty is given most in communist and Muslim countries. Interestingly, there are no communists in Muslim countries and likewise very few Muslims in Communist countries. They annihilate each other in their own terrain but politics of compulsion makes them cooperate with each other in democratic countries.

Conclusion;

The statistics prove that death penalty is a deterrence for crime. Law is deterrence. The countries which have least crime rate are those having death penalty, low number of commies and low number of Muslims. For this very reason death penalty is state policy in communist and Muslim countries. In China more than 3000 are executed per year and over a lakh by taking out organs from live prisoners for use by politburo members, their families and friends, Russia where hundreds are sent to gulags never to be seen again and north Korea where almost unknown number of executions are done every month. Death penalty is state policy in almost every Muslim country. 

In absence of deterrence, crime increases though effective policing, moral education, honest judiciary are also a factors. Honest law abiding people do not fear death penalty but some people have natural tendency for serious crime and they alone fear death penalty and that is the reason that Death Penalty is necessary as deterrent for such people.

Kapil Dev