Anna dares corruption

Request/Grievance Registration Number is : PRSEC/E/2011/05079

Dear Mr Anna Hazare,

Your fast unto death is futile and you are fighting a lost war.

I am reproducing two orders of Allahabad High Court, U.P. pertaining to my land being usurped by Sonia through her nominated Governor Banwari. Notwithstanding clear proof since 9th August, 1989, I could not get justice till to date. There is no law and no forum in India to get back my land or substitute, as suggested by Allahabad High Court. Judiciary is helpless in view of sec 197 of the Criminal Procedure Code. Can U get me back my lands?

You are fighting with the symptom, not the source. The source of corruption is Article 39(c) of the Indian Constitution. I am reproducing the Article below,

"39. Certain principles of policy to be followed by the State – The State shall, in particular, direct its policy towards securing –

(c) that the operation of the economic system does not result in the concentration of wealth and means of production to the common detriment;"

Thus a Public Servant, who has immunity under section 197 of the Criminal Procedure Code, has constraints to be corrupt. I am reproducing the sec.:-

197. Prosecution of Judges and public servants.

 (1) When any person who is or was a Judge or Magistrate or a public servant not removable from his office save by or with the sanction of the Government is accused of any offence alleged to have been committed by him while acting or purporting to act in the discharge of his official duty (to deprive citizens from their wealth and means of production is official duty of a public servant) no court shall take cognizance of such offence except with the previous sanction-

(a) In the case of a person who is employed or, as the case may be, was at the time of commission of the alleged offence employed, in connection with the affairs of the Union, of the Central Government;

(b) In the case of a person who is employed or, as the case may be, was at the time of commission of the alleged offence employed, in connection with the affairs of a State, of the State Government:

Do you not feel horrified that your status is of a sheep of Rom Rajya of Sonia? Sheep cannot have property and his flesh can be consumed by its owner, here, in your case, is Sonia. Sheep has no forum to complain!

There is no Democracy in India. This is a Government of Sonia, by Sonia and for Sonia. Don't agree? Here you are:-

President Pratibha Patil was nominated by Sonia. Every Governor of State is nominated by Sonia. Every chief minister of congress majority states is nominated by Sonia. Now Sonia has nominated PM Manmohan and Pranab too.

S. Swamy has dared Sonia to sue against him. He claims that the maximum share of 2G scam has gone to the account of sisters of Sonia. Yet there is no law to arrest her.

There is no law with me to get back my lands.

Suppose, all the parked money in foreign banks and scam money returns to the exchequer, then, how the common man would benefit, when 95% of the exchequer is being siphoned off by Sonia and her tools and vassals?

The answer to the present situation is relegation of the Article 39(c), revival of Article 31 and relegation of section 197 of the Criminal Procedure Code. We, the activists of Aryavrt Government and Abhinav Bharat are fighting the real war. Help us free our 9 officers if you want to end corruption and salvage human race.








Shiv Ashrey Tiwari and others ..........Petitioners


Ist . Addl. District Judge, Gorakhpur and others....Respdts.


Hon. Ravi S. Dhavan,J.

In compliance of your Lordship’s order, I checked annexure No. RA-5 and RA-6 on the record of writ Petition No. 9672/88 Sheo Asrey Tewari & anothers Vs. I Addl. District Judge & another in respect of plot no. 927 of village Turkamanpur Tappa Kasba Pargana Haveli Sadar Gorkhpur of the year 1323 fasli and 1295 fasli and found that conversation of the land from bigha to acres is correct.

In Khasra of village Turkmanpur(Collector’s record) of 1322 fasli, there are two sets of plots, against Plot no. 927, one set consists of sub -plot no,881, 882, 883 and 888. Another set consists of sub plot no. 875-876-877 and 878. In column no. 3 total area is written to be. 7.32 acre. But in Fard Mutabiqat (Comparative table) of 1322 fasli(Lekhpsl’s record) of village Turkmanpur plot no. 927 consists of sub-plots 881, 882,883,884,885, 875, 876, 877, 878 and 886. Thus, there addition of plot nos. 884 ,885 after plot no. 888 and 886 after plot no. 878 in Lekhpal’s record and both the records do not tally.

Against the original entry of plot no. 878, figure ‘8’was added on left side to make it read as ‘887’. Thereafter figure ‘8’ on the left side of original figure was cut. This gives impression that it can be read as 878 and 887 both. At page 99, there are cutting but no official has signed on such cutting.

As directed by your Lordship, Urdu, Hindi and English transliteration of the relevant records has been done, which is attached herewith for your Lordship’s kind perusal.

Submitted for kind perusal and order.


Joint Registrar ©



Sd. Illegible 3.9.90











Shiv Ashrey Tiwari and others ..........Petitioners


Ist . Addl. District Judge, Gorakhpur and others....Respdts.




Hon: Ravi S. Dhavan


The petitioner No. 2 in person, Mr. G.L. Tripathi Standing Counsel on behalf of state of U.P. Mr. S. Mandyan, Advocate for Respondent No. 4, holding the brief of Mr. B.D. Mandhyan, Advocate, Mr. K.B. Mathur, Advocate otherwise standing counsel, U.P. for Respondent No. 5.

The petitioner No. 2 has filed an affidavit with eleven annexures, which with the exception of one refer to the land records, otherwise in the possession of the district administration i.e. the State. A copy of this affidavit has already been delivered to counsel for the parties.

All the Respondents have jointly and unanimously prayed and requested the court that the matter be adjourned for today as they feel that the matter needs to be discussed with the Collector and District Magistrate, Gorakhpur. The reason for short adjournment was explained by learned counsel aforesaid. Regard being had to the record as of date, including certified copies of land records filed today, a short adjournment over the week-end was desired to obtain instructions. It was further contended that in consultation with the Collector/ District Magistrate party Respondents would seek instructions to suggest a proposal if another tract of land contiguous to that in the possession of petitioner, as of date, can be made available, subject to such orders as may be passed by this court, so that the interest of all parties can be protected. The request for adjournment, to let the Collector and District Magistrate consider the matter is not unreasonable. The matter is thus adjourned to be listed on August 18, 1989, as August 15 and 17 are public holidays.

After the aforesaid order was passed and at the rising of the court, Mr. B.D. Mandhyan, Advocate entered appearance to insist that the matter be taken up as unlisted tomorrow. The Court requested learned counsel to be briefed by his colleagues in this case on the proceedings as are on record, during his absence, as the request for adjournment may ultimately see a solution and end litigation. Learned counsel insisted that the District Magistrate Gorakhpur has nothing to do with the matter and that he must have his say.

As the matter cannot proceed beyond court hours in any case, place as unlisted tomorrow so that Mr. B.D. Mandhyan, Advocate, may have his say on whatever he contends. Let the record be before the court.

Sd. Ravi S. Dhavan, J.



ap tripathi,
Apr 6, 2011, 7:35 AM