Argument 153A-IPC

IN THE COURT OF HON’BLE SRI RAGHUBIR SINGH ACMM TISHAZARI

WRITTEN ARGUMENT IN DEFENCE OF THE ACCUSED

IN

FIR No. 440/1996 PS ROOP NAGAR, DELHI NORTH

In the matter of:-

State V/s Ayodhya Prasad Tripathi

DOH: Oct. 11, 2012

Hon’ble sir,

I, Ayodhya Prasad Tripathi, the accused in the above case, state as here under,

1.              That in my answer to the charge, dated January 27, 1998, on record, I had already accepted that I had edited, printed on my printer and distributed THE pamphlet, ‘KIRAYA KANOON’ among the public, exercising my right as provided in the Article 19 of the Indian Constitution and sections 102 and 105 of the Indian Penal Code. For the reason of brevity, I am not repeating them. The same may kindly be accepted as Ex.D1 of this affidavit. This Hon’ble Court has uselessly wasted her time since 1997 A.D. in proving the very fact.

Judiciary is guided by the Indian Constitution. Its compiler wanted to burn it.

From Rajya Sabha debates; September 2, 1953

"Now, Sir," the member said, "we have inherited a tradition. People always keep saying to me: 'Oh, you are the maker of the Constitution.' "My answer is - I was a hack. What I was asked to do, I did much against my will.

“He ridiculed the "notions of democracy" the country had acquired because of its hatred of the British, like the notion that to leave any discretionary powers with the Governor is undemocratic. "We have inherited the idea that the Governor must have no power at all, that he must be a rubber-stamp," the member explained. "If a minister, however scoundrelly he may be, if he puts up a proposal before the Governor, he has to ditto it. That is the kind of conception about democracy, which we have developed in this country," he continued.

"But you defended it," interjected a member from Rajasthan.

"We lawyers defend many things....," said the member. Several members were on their feet protesting.

He proceeded to ask the Home Minister : “were our Constitution to give discretionary powers to Governors on the lines of the Canadian Constitution, how would it become undemocratic?” The Home Minister said his answer was that the member had been responsible for drafting the Constitution. The member shot back, "You want to accuse me of your blemishes?"

He returned to the point a little later in his speech : "Sir," he said, "my friends tell me that I have made the Constitution. But I am quite prepared to say that I shall be the first person to burn it out. I do not want it. It does not suit anybody...." (Except Sonia).

The member ? B.R. Ambedkar, of course!, who compiled the Indian Constitution.

"IN OUR CONSTITUENT ASSEMBLY this twenty-sixth day of November 1949, do HEREBY ADOPT, ENACT, AND GIVE TO OURSELVES THIS CONSTITUTION."

This is fraud. Those, who compiled the Constitution, were not elected by the people of Bharat after transfer of power by Jesus. No referendum or plebiscite was ever arranged to obtain the consent of the people about body of the Indian Constitution. Then how the people of Bharat enacted, adopted and given to themselves this code of usurpers, murderers, rapists, secession mongers etc.?

URL: http://www.constitution.org/cons/india/p03029.html

PART III

FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS

“Cultural and Educational Rights

‘’29. Protection of Interests of Minorities-(1) Any section of the citizens residing in the territories of India or any part thereof having a distinct language, script, or culture of its own shall have the right to conserve the same.’’

DIRECTIVE PRINCIPLES OF STATE POLICY

"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;"

Whoever would become President or Governor, s/he would take oath to preserve, protect and defend the very predator and pirate Indian Constitution, which has been compiled to conserve the so called dreaded cultures of the so-called minority Christian and Muslim, who are the largest and the second largest population of the world.

Section 196 of the CrPC

196. Prosecution for offences against the State and for criminal conspiracy to commit such offence.

(1) No court shall take cognizance of-

(a) Any offence punishable under Chapter VI or under section 153A, 1[section 295A or sub-section (1) of section 505] of the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860), or
punishable under sections 153/295 of the Indian Penal Code

(b) A criminal conspiracy to commit such offence, or

(c) Any such abetment, as is described in section 108A of the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860), except with the previous sanction of the central Government or of the State Government.

2[(1A) No court shall take cognizance of -

(a) Any offence punishable under section 153B or sub-section (2) or sub-section (2) or sub-section (3) of section 505 of the Indian Panel Code (45 of 1860), or
(b) A criminal conspiracy to commit such offence,

Except with the previous sanction of the Central Government or of the State Government or of the District Magistrate.]

(2) No court shall take cognizance of the offence of any criminal conspiracy punishable under section 120B of the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860), other than a criminal conspiracy to commit 3[an offence] punishable with death, imprisonment for life or rigorous imprisonment for a term of two years or upwards, unless the State Government or the District Magistrate has consented in writing to the initiation of the proceeding:

Nay! Even police and public have to silently bear the scourge of Christianity and Islam, who are slaves and have been detained in India to enslave one and all and eradicate Vedic Sanaatan Dharm. I am a victim of the very black law.

A close study of the Indian Constitution makes it clear that Article 29(1) of the Indian Constitution has been compiled to slay Hindus. I have elaborated it in the coming lines. Article 39(c) of the Indian Constitution has been compiled to snatch the properties and capital of citizens. Articles 60 and 159 have been compiled to preserve, protect and defend the rights of Christians and Muslims by President of India and Governors. This Indian Constitution was enforced on January 26, 1950. Since then till to date no one challenged the above Articles. As such even Tata and Ambanis would lose their empire within seconds.

Suggestion to Muslims

Article 29(1) of the Indian Constitution has bound public servants to preserve, protect and defend Christianity and Islam. For sustenance, power and pelf a public servant, legislature and PM has to depose faith and allegiance in the dreaded predator and pirate Indian Constitution as per Schedule III in various forms. A high court and apex court judge has to take oath to uphold the Indian Constitution as per Schedule III forms IV and VIII. President takes oath to preserve, protect and defend the Indian Constitution as per Article 60 and Governors take oath to preserve, protect and defend the Indian Constitution as per Article 159. Governors and Judges, who administer oath to each other, have no choice. Either one has to leave one’s dignity, right of life and property and freedom else one’s sustenance.

No voter can change Articles 29(1) and 39(c) and no voter can claim restoration of Article 31 of the Indian Constitution. Thus, one votes to decide as to who would plunder one? Whether Atal or Mulayam or Rahul or Antonia Maino? One accepts through electoral process that every Muslim and Christian shall retain right to convert, rape women of alien faith, plunder and murder aliens. Still the Christians and Muslims would remain nationalist, merciful, and secular! Socialism of Carl Marx has already gone to hell. Now is the turn of Christianity and Islam.

It is relevant to mention that Sonia and her nominated Hamid are deputed to eradicate Vedic Sanaatan Dharm and slay humanity and I am engaged in preserving, protecting and defending our Vedic Sanaatan Dharm. It is the LG, NCT of Delhi, who is committing offence of preserving, protecting and defending Christianity and Islam.

In the instance case the public servants themselves are protecting and defending our killer Christians and Muslims, as such the sections 99 and 153A are not applicable against me. Because there is no question of asking for protection u/s 99 of the Indian Penal Code, when the public servants themselves are defending our killers for their sustenance, power, pelf and financial status?

The Indian Constitution was implemented on January 26, 1950. Till to date no one protested against Articles 29(1), 39(c), 60 and 159 and no one protested against section 196 of the Criminal Procedure Code. Accordingly everyone from top to bottom has voluntarily delivered one’s women, land and property to Christians and Muslims and relinquished one’s culture. However, the rights of Muslims are in share with Christians. I suggest Muslims to grab authority by wresting the monopoly from Christian Sonia. Rest assured that right from me until Pranab Da would happily make queue to deliver Muslims whatever we have, including our girls. We have no option.

2.              That I have been accused for committing crime u/s 153A of the Indian Penal Code, which I never committed, instead I have exercised my right of private defense u/ss 97, 99, 102 and 105 of the Indian Penal Code. This Hon’ble Court has no choice than to act upon the sanction of the LG u/s 196 of the CrPC. I am reproducing the section 153A,

1[153A. Promoting enmity between different groups on grounds of religion, race, place of birth, residence, language, etc., and doing acts prejudicial to maintenance of harmony.—(1) whoever—

“(a) By words, either spoken or written, or by signs or by visible representations or otherwise, promotes or attempts to promote, on grounds of religion, race, place or birth, residence, language, caste or community or any other ground whatsoever, disharmony or feelings of enmity, hatred or ill-will between different religious, racial, language or regional groups or castes or communities, or” 

“(b) Commits any act which is prejudicial to the maintenance of harmony between different religious, racial, language or regional groups or castes or communities, and which disturbs or is likely to disturb the public tranquility,…

"Shall be punished with imprisonment which may extend to three years, or with fine, or with both.”

May I know what is Azaan and Kutras preached from mosques?

3.     That I am reproducing other sections 96, 97, 99 and 102 of the Indian Penal Code below,

Section 96. Things done in private defense

Nothing is an offence which is done in the exercise of the right of private defense.

The Hon’ble Supreme Court has observed, “(iii) where the right of private defense is pleaded, the defense must be a reasonable and probable version satisfying the cast that the harm caused by the accused was necessary for either warding off the attack or for forestalling the further reasonable apprehension from the side of the accused. The burden of establishing the plea of self-defense is on the accused and the burden stands discharged by showing preponderance of probabilities in favour of that plea on the basis of the material on record; Rizan v. State of Chattisgarh, AIR 2003 SC 976. A copy of the judgment is being attached with this WRITTEN ARGUMENT and is marked as (Annexure-s1).”

http://www.indiankanoon.org/doc/29943/

Christians and Muslims are fighting with full determination to annihilate Vedic Sanaatan Dharm under the sponsorship of the dreaded predator and pirate Indian Constitution, which is a booby trap. [As per Article 29(1) of the Indian Constitution, oaths of President Pranab, Governors, (Articles 60 and 159 of the Indian Constitution), Judiciary, National Human Rights Commission and law makers (MLAs, MPs etc).]

Indian Penal Code (IPC)

Section 97. Right of private defense of the body and of property

Every person has a right, subject to the restrictions contained in section 99, to defend—

 First.— His own body, and the body of any other person, against any offence affecting the human body;

 Secondly.—The property, whether movable or immovable, of himself or of any other person, against any act which is an offence falling under the definition of theft, robbery, mischief or criminal trespass, or which is an attempt to commit theft, rob­bery, mischief or criminal trespass.

Section 99. Act against which there is no right of private defense

There is no right of private defense against an act which does not reasonable cause the apprehension of death or of grievous hurt, if done, or attempted to be done, by a public servant acting in good faith under colour of his office, though that act, may not be strictly justifiable by law.

There is no right of private defense against an act which does not reasonable cause the apprehension of death or of grievous hurt, if done, or attempted to be done, by the direction of a public servant acting in good faith under colour of his office, though that direction may not be strictly justifiable by law.

There is no right of private defense in cases in which there is time to have recourse to the protection of the public authorities.

Section 102. Commencement and continuance of the right of private defense of the body,

The right of private defense of the body commences as soon as a reasonable apprehension of danger to the body arises from an attempt or threat to commit the offence though the offence may not have been committed; and it continues as long as such apprehension of danger to the body continues.

Section 105. Commencement and continuance of the right of private defense of property

The Right of private defense of property commences when a reasonable apprehension of danger to the property commences.

The right of private defense of property against theft continues till the offender has effected his retreat with the property or either the assistance of the public authorities is obtained, or the property has been recovered.

4.     That the section 196 of the CrPC proves impotency of judges, who have no choice than submitting to the rulers (Now Sonia). Imams incite communal hatred, commit acts prejudicial to maintenance of harmony and abuse and insult the deities of judges by shouting Azaan. During discussions, persons with jurisprudence claim that Britons love justice. Yet Police could and cannot prosecute Imams and judges cannot try Imams for their (Imams) crime of inciting communal hatred u/s 153/295 of the Indian Penal Code. Indian Penal Code was enacted in 1860 A.D. Since then Muslim Imams/Maulavies preach, verses of Koran, which are prejudicial to maintenance of harmony and incite genocide of non-Muslims from Mosques on the ground of faith. Still the judges are helpless. I have reproduced the relevant sections above.

 According to sections quoted above, the Right of private defense of body and property of Vedic Panthies commenced since 1860 A.D. and continue until Christianity and Islam are eradicated!

http://intellibriefs.blogspot.in/2005/02/imam-and-shankaracharya-not-rule-of.html

5.              That the sections 97, 99, 102 and 105 of the Indian Penal Code, quoted above, grant one right to private defence. Section 99 is not applicable in the cases of death and grievous hurt.  Christianity and Islam have been detained in India for eradicating Vedic Sanaatan Dharm. Law enforcing agency, with which one may ask for recourse, is helpless as per section 196 of the Criminal Procedure Code. Christians devoured Red Indians of America and their Maya culture. Now, in collusion with Sonia, they are after black Indians and Vedic Sanaatan Dharm of India. We have potential threat to our life and property from Christianity and Islam. We are exercising our right to private defense. We are not committing any offence as per section 96 of the Indian Penal Code. Hamid Ansari, the Vice President of India, has been commanded by Allah to slay non-Muslims [(Koran, 2:191-194 and 8:39) read with Article 29(1) of the Indian Constitution] and Antonia Maino alias Sonia Gandhi has been commanded by Jesus to slay those, who do not accept Jesus their king. [(Bible, Luke 19:27) read with Article 29(1) of the Indian Constitution]. Hamid has taken oath to preserve, protect and defend the Indian Constitution as per Article 60 and Governor of States has taken oath to preserve, protect and defend the Indian Constitution as per Article 159 of the Indian Constitution. Judges have taken oath to uphold the Indian Constitution as per Schedule III forms IV and VIII. Both, Hamid and governors are nominees of Sonia. Sonia, along with legislators and ministers, has taken oath of faith and allegiance in the Indian Constitution as per Schedule III, in various forms. The Article 29(1) of the Indian Constitution has provided unfettered fundamental right to Christians and Muslims to conserve their culture of plunder, murder, rape of women and conversion.

6.              That in this instant case prosecution has miserably failed to prove her case. The complainant home secretary was not examined. Even there is no Muslim or Christian witness, whose religious feelings were hurt or animousity, was aroused. No one proved sanction u/s 196 of the CrPC. In contrast Muslims and Christians are hurting our feelings and declaring openly animosity on the ground faith. However, we cannot register complaint against Christians and Muslims for want of sanction u/s 196 of the CrPC. The Indian Constitution has, with its compilation, snatched the chastity of women, (Bible, Isaiah 13:16) and (Koran 23:6), the right to worship [Article 29(1) of the Indian Constitution and right to property (Koran, 8:1, 69 and 41) Article 39(c) of the Indian Constitution] from citizens since November 26, 1949. President of hapless India and the State Governors are armed with Sections 196 and 197 of the Criminal Procedure Code and section 80 of the Civil Procedure Code to defend corrupt assassins and rapists to ensure genocide of Aryans. Judiciary has held Koran and Bible religious books. Armed with the section 196 of Criminal Procedure Code that restrains citizens, judges or police from taking any action against Azaan and Namaaz u/s 153 and 295 of the Indian Penal Code, President and Governors are helplessly protecting assassins, robbers and rapists to eradicate Aryans as such are defenders of criminals. No judge can take cognizance against Azaan, Koran and Bible under the very section 196 of the CrPC. Police THAT cannot arrest Muslim Imam, who shouts Azaan and thus insults Ishwar and Vedic culture, are deputed to protect Muslims, who abuse non-Muslim faiths and incite communal violence. No Police can be prosecuted under the section 197 of the Criminal Procedure Code. Citizens of India have legal right to take back fundamental right to property and save their lives. However, no individual can exercise the rights. Aryavrt Government is here to protect human race from Hamid and Sonia.

7.     That the above comments may horrify this Hon’ble court, World Police Obama, Pranab Dada, Antonia, Hurriat, Hammas, Hezbollah, judges, Communists, Democrats, Muslims and Christians. However, they cannot blame me, instead they have to blame their democracy, their faiths, their Allah, their Jehovah, their clergy and their leaders, who, purposely, deceived them and are still deceiving them. If they still do not relinquish their criminal and immoral faiths and dreaded Democracy, they are left without any excuse. They must note that Marx, Allah and Jehovah are their own enemies. They have initiated war against humanity and even against Muslims and Christians since their inception.

8.     That although I explained, in my reply to charge, dated January 27, 1998, which is Ex. 1D, on record, that I am exercising my right of private defense, the presiding officer of the judiciary ignored my submissions for the fear of losing her job. The P.O. has no choice. The Indian Constitution has been compiled to eradicate Vedic Sanaatan Dharm.

What for is section 196 of the Criminal Procedure Code compiled?

My direct questions:

9.     That section 196 of the Criminal Procedure Code has been compiled to abridge the rights granted under sections 102 and 105 of the Indian Penal Code and insure eradication of Vedic Sanaatan Dharm. Governors and public servants have no choice. For sustenance, power and pelf a public servant, legislature and PM has to depose faith and allegiance in the dreaded predator and pirate Indian Constitution as per Schedule III in various forms. A high court and apex court judge has to take oath to uphold the Indian Constitution as per Schedule III forms IV and VIII. Governors take oath to preserve, protect and defend the Indian Constitution as per Article 159. Governors and Judges, who administer oath to each other, have no choice. Either one has to relinquish one’s dignity, right of life and property and freedom or one’s sustenance, power and pelf. I seek answer of my direct questions: Article 29(1) of the Indian Constitution grants unfettered fundamental right to Christians and Muslims to conserve their cultures of Jihad and Mission. Before occupying offices President (Article 60 of the Indian Constitution) and Governors (Article 159 of the Indian Constitution) take oath to preserve, protect and defend the Indian Constitution, which has granted unfettered fundamental right to Christians and Muslims to slay Hindus. Since January 26, 1950 till to date, who questioned the authority of President of India and Governors, who are preserving, protecting and defending our killers and robbers? Should they remain in office? And if they remain with such powers can Vedic Sanaatan Dharm survive?  We had been promised Ram Rajya and freedom of faith by Pakpita Gandhi. Christianity and Islam force even their own followers to relinquish their freedom of faith. Why should we accept servility of Rome Rajya of Sonia? If Allah alone can be worshipped and Jesus alone can be king, where is freedom of faith and self rule promised by the Indian Constitution and 'Universal Declaration of Human Rights' of UNO? If Jesus alone can be king, where is self rule, which Gandhi heralded through Ahimsa? There is covenant between Government and citizens that she (government) would protect citizens' properties. Where is the moral in Article 39(c) of the Indian Constitution that snatches properties and means of production of the citizens? Where is the moral in omitting Article 31 of the Indian Constitution? If spoils of war belong to Allah, (Koran 8:1), why Allah is not robber? If booty belongs to Jews, 20:14 why are they not robbers? Women would either be raped by Muslims (Koran 23:6) or by Christians (Bible, Isaiah 13:16). Where is the dignity of women promised by the preamble of the Indian Constitution? Why should rapists survive on the earth? People, who deprive the citizens from their freedom of religion, must be slain as per their own dogmas. Aryavrt Government wants to award capital punishment to evangelists. Sonia Government must be removed to save humanity.

10.         That we, the activists of Aryavrt Government, are against Christianity and Islam. With the connivance of the Article 29(1) of the Indian Constitution this Hon’ble Court cannot try Imaams shouting Azaan, from their mosques preaching genocide, love Jihad, demolishing temples, refusing to recite Vande Matram, exercising Talak and demanding for Shariyat law and killing cows. What this Hon’ble court would do if a Qazi comes in this very court and declares that the P.O. must vacate chair for Qazi as per Shariyat. Where is the law in India to stop Muslims? However, in contrast, there is law that Muslims have unfettered fundamental right to conserve their culture (SHARIYA).

11.         That, Mosques are training centers for hating, inciting communal hatred and abusing faiths and deities of non-Muslim faiths. Mosques have no right to survive.

12.         That Police has no choice. She is law enforcing agency. The Indian Constitution is predator and pirate. Delhi Police is being blackmailed by LG under section 197 of the Criminal Procedure Code, who has taken oath under Article 159 of the Indian Constitution to preserve, protect and defend Christianity and Islam. Christianity and Islam have divine command to eradicate Vedic Sanaatan Dharm.

13.         That our Ishwar provides one and all, including Muslims and Christians, liberty of faith (Gita 7:21) and Right to Property (Manusmriti 8:308). In contrast World belongs to Allah (Koran 2:255). Muslims are Allah's hired killers of those, who worship any other god save Allah (Azaan and Koran 21:98) and usurp the victims’ lands, properties, children and women. (Koran, 8:1, 69 and 41). Qaba belongs to idol worshippers. Are Muslims going to return Qaba to idol worshippers? Azaan is blasphemy of our Ishwar.

14.         That to add insult to injury they call these criminal guides religious books and to tell contrary is crime amounting to blasphemy with sanction of death penalty! If Bible and Koran are religious books and to usurp alien lands, plunder aliens, rape aliens’ women are religion one wonders what crime is. So the time is ripe to wipe out criminal religions Christianity and Islam.

15.         That Muslims and Christians are fools. They are committing crime with the human race in lust of booty and sex. They are accepting servilities of the prevailing rulers. They are being cheated by their clerics and rulers in lieu of booty and sex.

16.         That Muslims are killers of non-Muslims. Muslims are robbers and rapists under divine commands. We, Citizens of India, have right of Private Defence under sections 102 and 105 of the Indian Penal Code. Citizens of India have been promised liberty. However, Islam is submission to Allah, hence there is no liberty in Islam. Qaba is booty. (Koran, Bani Israel, 17:81) Azaan is insult to gods of non-Muslims and incite communal hatred. Azaan attracts prosecution under Sections 153 and 295 of the Indian Penal Code. Koran is nothing but a political manual for enslaving humanity with terror. (Koran 8:39; 9:5; 33:61 etc).

17.         That the dreaded democracy of Bharat could not produce a single President/PM for this country and nation is constrained to import cow and man-eater super PM Antonia Maino and her refugee PM puppet Manmohan! Both Hamid Ansari, the Vice President of India, and Antonia Maino have been commanded by Allah and Jesus to slay us. Why should Aryans tolerate such Democracy?

18.         That has humanity no shame for being ruled by dreaded criminals supported by the Indian Constitution, Koran and Bible? Media has no right to conceal the true face of Antonia Maino and Hamid Ansari, the Vice President of India, and their dreaded guides Koran and Bible aided and abetted by the dreaded Indian Constitution and shielded by Section 196 of the Criminal Procedure Code.

19.         That Islamist Khomeini stated that the "Koran says: kill, imprison! Why are you (Muslims) only clinging to the part those talks about mercy? Mercy is against God"; and, "We need a Khalifa (leader of Islamic state) who would chop hands, cut throat, stone people etc."

http://www.frontpagemagazine.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID={D48F41F9-D9B7-4BD7-A45F-7A21E6126A27}

20.         That Pakistani radical Muslim theorist Syed Abul Ala Maududi declared that "Islam requires the earth - not just a portion, but the whole planet - not because the sovereignty over the earth should be wrested from one Nation or several Nations and vested in one particular Nation, but because the entire mankind should benefit ... from 'Islam' which is the programme of well-being for all humanity.

21.         That Maududi insisted that non-Muslims, although free to practice their “false, man-made way,” have “absolutely neither right to seize the reins of power in any part of God’s earth nor to direct the collective affairs of human beings according to their own misconceived doctrines.” If they do, “the believers would be under an obligation to do their utmost to dislodge them from political power and to make them live in subservience to the Islamic way of life.”

22.           That we are bombing mosque and churches under our right to private defense as provided in Section 102 of the IPC. We are different. We have consumed the fruit from the tree of knowledge. Therefore, we can see that Shahada is slavery. Azaan is abuse and blasphemy of our Ishwar and offence under sections 153 and 295 of the Indian Penal Code. Muslims must be prosecuted and punished. Aryavrt seeks support of this Hon’ble Court so that the immunity granted to Imaams under section 196 of the Criminal Procedure Code could be withdrawn.

For further details browse, URL;

http://aaryavrt.blogspot.com/2007/09/do-you-know.html

23.         That Aryans are still the slaves of British Crown. Slaves have no civil rights. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_Independence_Act_1947 India's Dominion Status, [Article 6(b)(ii) of the Indian Constitution], Section 3(6) of the General Clauses Act and being member of Common Wealth are proofs. Thus, basic cause, i.e. protection of lands, lives, ladies, liberties, and labours of the subjects, for whom the governments are invented and implemented, is getting defeated. The snatching of one’s belongings, which is a crime, turns into the religious duty of every follower of these criminal religions and first part of the duties of democratic and socialist governments. The followers of these religions, socialists, and democrats find no immorality in snatching one’s property, one’s women, and killing an innocent. As per the dogmas of Islam, Non-Muslims are Dhimmis reduced under the status of chastened subservience. Ghost and bastard Jesus commands Christians to slay those, who do not accept Jesus their ruler. (Bible, Luke 19:27). Our fate has been sealed since November 26, 1949. A situation one does not dare to protest. We are consigned in the jaws of two criminal killing cultures named Christianity and Islam through the Article 29(1) of the very Indian Constitution. Humanity is victim of Allah, Jesus the only son of Jehovah and Democracy. Either one does not worship Allah alone (Koran 21:98) or does not accept Jesus one’s ruler (Bible, Luke 19:27), as such Christians and Muslims are religiously and constitutionally right in murdering their common enemy Aryans because Aryans do not want Jesus to be their king. They waged war since 1857 against British rule and they do not worship Allah alone. Christians and Muslims have been provided unfettered fundamental right to conserve their very culture of slaughter vide Article 29(1) of the Indian Constitution.

24.         That there are three valid reasons with me to exercise my right of private defense.

One. The Indian Constitution has been compiled by the Britons' Congress Party in retaliation and to settle vendetta for opposing British rule amongst other reasons. Britons have to herald ‘Armageddon’ through Sonia. As long as the Indian Constitution, Koran and Bible and their dogmas are honoured in Bharat, we, Aryans, cannot survive. Nay! Either one does not worship Allah alone (Koran 21:98) or does not accept Jesus one’s ruler (Bible, Luke 19:27), as such Christians and Muslims would kill each other and humanity would become extinct like dinosaurs. We, Aryans, are Kafirs and Satans. Now, we have secular Hamid Ansari, the Vice President of India, who has taken oath to help Muslims conserve their cultures commanded by Allah to slay us. Our crime? We are idolaters (Koran 9:5). We have another imported and planted secular cow and man eater thief of Aamer Fort treasury Antonia Maino as super PM, who has been commanded by Jesus to slay us. Our crime? We do not accept Jesus our king. (Bible, Luke 19:27). Sonia is here to establish Jesus’ Empire through Armageddon for his second coming to rule upon the world. If no Armageddon, then no second coming of Christ to rule upon the earth! Sonia is obsessed with this devilish thought of human carnage so staggering that the loss of human life of the 1st and the 2nd World Wars combined would seem like scar on human body. We have a notorious predator and pirate Indian Constitution, the Article 29(1) of which has already granted unfettered fundamental right to both killers named Hamid Ansari, the Vice President of India, and Antonia Maino, to help conserve the Christianity and Islam cultures of genocide, i.e. to slay us, plunder and rape of women to secure their seat in heavenly brothel.

The salient features of the whole Democracy are very perplexing. The eradication of Vedic culture, elimination of Bharat from World map and rape of women has purposely been linked with the sustenance, power, pelf and financial status of a public servant. If a public servant wishes to serve, the public servant has to get slain. Those responsible for protecting and informing the subjects have given priority to their financial well being over protecting their people, their own culture, their own infants, their own lives and chastity of their own women. We were promised Ram Rajya and ended with Rome Rajya. We fought for independence and ended with the servility of Sonia. Does the Hon’ble court not feel horrified?

Plundering the possessions of the citizens is not considered crime but has become integral part of the duties of public servants. It is stipulated by the Article 39(c) of the Indian Constitution. The public servants are supporters of minorities in the conservation of their culture of murder, plunder; incest and rape of women as such are digging their own graves. So long as the public servants loot citizens, there is nothing bad. The dispute arises when the public servants do not share the booty with Pranab Dada and Antonia Maino and their tools and vassals.

Who is Sonia?

Bible says, "At this time he (JESUS) will make Jerusalem his world capitol & outlaw all religions, except the worship of himself & his image. The Bible says that the Antichrist will sit in the Jewish Temple exalting himself as God & demanding to be worshipped. (Like Hiranyakashyap and his Daitya culture)". Where is freedom of faith guaranteed by the preamble of the Indian Constitution?

http://www.countdown.org/armageddon/antichrist.htm

Antonia Maino alias Sonia Gandhi is Catholic Christian. Even her son, daughter and son in law are Catholic Christians. Those people of India, who have voted both Antonia Maino and Rahul to send them into Parliament, are enemies of humanity. They have put their own lives, their own culture, their own mother land, their own infants, their own women and their own properties in jeopardy. Of course Antonia Maino alias Sonia Gandhi and Rahul would thank their voters for making them MPs by raping their women in front of their own eyes on the divine command of Jehovah the father of ghost and bastard Jesus. (Bible, Isaiah 13:16). Antonia Maino and Rahul have been commanded by Jesus to slay those, who do not accept Jesus their king. (Bible, Luke 19:27). Antonia Maino is residing in Bharat to baptize, bring fire and division among the families of the entire globe. (Bible-Luke/ Chapter 12 / Verse 49-53).

25.         That there is no Democracy in India. This is a Government of Sonia, by Sonia and for Sonia. Don't agree? Here are the evidences:-

26.         That President Pranab Dada is nominated by Sonia. Every Governor of State is nominated by Sonia. Every chief minister of congress majority states is nominated by Sonia. Sonia has nominated PM Manmohan too. Governors are not elected by people of the State in which the Governors rule. Yet they can topple even any non-congress Government elected by the people of the state.

Jesuit

http://www.reformation.org/jesuit_oath_in_action.html

Jesuit Sonia has promised as under,

I (Antonia Maino alias Sonia Gandhi) furthermore promise and declare that I will, when opportunity present, make and wage relentless war, secretly or openly, against all heretics, Protestants and Liberals, as I am directed to do, to extirpate and exterminate them from the face of the whole earth; and that I will spare neither age, sex or condition; and that I will hang, waste, boil, flay, strangle and bury alive these infamous heretics, rip up the stomachs and wombs of their women and crush their infants' heads against the walls, in order to annihilate forever their execrable race. That when the same cannot be done openly, I will secretly use the poisoned cup, the strangulating cord, the steel of the poniard or the leaden bullet, regardless of the honor, rank, dignity, or authority of the person or persons, whatever may be their condition in life, either public or private, as I at any time may be directed so to do by any agent of the Pope or Superior of the Brotherhood of the Holy Faith, of the Society of Jesus.

27.         That one may remember! We are not buying that this is an evil world and that we all are sinners. We are also not buying that as we are not baptized, we will go into Hell and burn forever. Also, we are not buying that if we are baptized we are given a promise that we will go to Heaven of fools, wherefrom Adam was chased away (Bible, Genesis 2:17) and live with the bastard and ghost Lord forever, regardless of what we do. We are not buying that because we are baptized all our sins will be forgiven. We believe in logic and Christians believe in faith. 

28.         That Muslims' Allah and his Islam have divided humanity between Momins and Kafirs and territories between Dar-Ul-Herb and Dar-Ul-Islam. Slay or convert Kafirs into Momins and convert Dar-Ul-Herb into Dar-Ul-Islam is Jihad. (Koran 8:39). Jihad is divine command and sure path to either secure heavenly brothel or honour of Ghazi with ownership of Kafirs' land, women and properties.

29.         That reading Allah’s orders out of the Koran’s 8th surah, Imaams preach: “O Prophet, urge the faithful to fight. If there are twenty among you with determination they will vanquish two hundred; if there are a hundred then they will kill a thousand Infidels, for they are a people devoid of understanding.” That is the math of terror. It is being made possible because infidels are ignorant of Islam. In addition, note how, the Koran defines “Infidels”. “They are surely Infidels who say Christ, the Messiah is God.” (5:72)

30.         That read how Allah recruits suicide bombers: “Those who barter their life in this world for the next should fight in the way of Allah; whether he is killed or victorious, a glorious reward awaits.” “Urge the believers to fight…to keep back the might of the Infidels.” “Seize them and kill them wherever they are.” “Muslims, who sit idle, are not equal to those who fight in Allah’s Cause with their wealth and lives. Allah has exalted those, who fight for Islam.”

31.         That read the words of the Saudi ruling family’s favorite Imaam, al Buraik. He is licensed Imaam, He’s atop the social hierarchy. Prior to a telethon hosted to enrich the families of Palestinian suicide bombers, this esteemed cleric said, “I am against America. She is the root of all evils and wickedness on earth. Muslims, don’t take Jews and Christians as allies. Muslim brothers in Palestine, do not have any mercy or compassion on them, their blood, their money, or their flesh. Their women are yours to take, legitimately. Allah made them yours. Why don’t you enslave their women? Why don’t you wage jihad? Why don’t you pillage (plunder) them?”

32.         That, do you suppose the licensed Saudi cleric was corrupting Islam too? Sorry. It’s Allah who commands Muslims not to befriend Christians and Jews, for he wants them killed so he can use their bodies to stoke hell’s fires. “O believers do not hold Jews and Christians as your allies. They are allies of one another; and anyone who makes them his friends is one of them.” Koran 5:51. “As for those who deny Islam...they shall be the faggots for the Fire of Hell.” Koran 2:10. “Allah said, ‘A prophet must slaughter before collecting captives. A slaughtered enemy is driven from the land. Muhammad, you craved the desires of this world, its goods and the ransom captives would bring. But Allah desires killing them to manifest the religion.” Koran 8:67. Therefore, Saudi Imaam has correctly interpreted Islam’s message. “Allah made the Jews leave their homes by terrorizing them so that you killed some and made many captive. And He made you inherit their lands, their homes, and their wealth. He gave you a country you had not traversed before.” Koran 33:26. This is the peace.

33.         That, does this Hon’ble Court know? The Islamic warlords, who rule Saudi Arabia, were enthroned by the British, by way of reward. The Britons bribed them to fight against their Muslim brethren, the Ottoman Turks, in the World War I.

34.         That there is nothing peaceful about Islam. Islam’s dogmas breed ruthless killers. At her direction, Muslims will continue to terrorize the world until non-Muslims are no more.

Koran 61:4 “Surely Allah loves those who fight in His Cause.” Ishaq:300 “I am fighting in Allah’s service. This is piety and a good deed. In Allah’s war I do not fear as others should. For this fighting is righteous, true, and good.”

 “When you clash with the unbelieving Infidels in battle (fighting Jihad in Allah’s Cause), smite their necks until you overpower them, killing and wounding many of them. At length, when you have thoroughly subdued them, bind them firmly, making (them) captives. Thereafter treat either generosity or ransom (based upon what benefits Islam) until the war lays down its burdens. Thus are you commanded by Allah to continue carrying out Jihad against the unbelieving infidels until they submit to Islam.” Koran 47:4

35.         That this Hon’ble court may forget me and think as to how would the P.O. protect her own dignity, life and property?

http://www.aryavrt.com/Home/aseemananda/yes-we-are-bombing-mosques

Two: That to proselytize is grievous sin and attracts death penalty in Christianity and Islam both. Below are the extracts from Bible and Koran.

http://aaryavrt.blogspot.com/2009/12/conversion-christianity-and-islam.html

Conversion, Christianity and Islam

Would Sonia, the super PM of India, for the commands of Jehovah, let me know as to why missionaries of India, engaged in conversion, are not killed?

(Bible, Deuteronomy 13:6-11)

“6 If thy brother, the son of thy mother, or thy son, or thy daughter, or the wife of thy bosom, or thy friend, which [is] as thine own soul, entice thee secretly, saying, Let us go and serve other gods, which thou hast not known, thou, nor thy fathers;

“7 [Namely], of the gods of the people which [are] round about you, nigh unto thee, or far off from thee, from the [one] end of the earth even unto the [other] end of the earth;

“8 Thou shalt not consent unto him, nor hearken unto him; neither shall thine eye pity him, neither shalt thou spare, neither shalt thou conceal him:

“9 But thou shalt surely kill him; thine hand shall be first upon him to put him to death, and afterwards the hand of all the people.

“10 And thou shalt stone him with stones, that he dies; because he hath sought to thrust thee away from the LORD thy God, which brought thee out of the land of Egypt, from the house of bondage.

“11 And all Israel shall hear, and fear, and shall do no more any such wickedness as this is among you.”

May Hamid Ansari, the Vice-President let me as to why should we not seize Muslims and kill them wherever we find them?

Extracted from Koran,

Koran 4:89 “They wish that you would reject Faith, as they have, and thus be on the same footing: Do not be friends with them until they leave their homes in Allah’s Cause. But [and this is a hell of a but...] if they turn back from Islam, becoming renegades/apostates, seize them and kill them wherever you find them.”

Prior to 3263 years there was no Jew. Earlier than 2012 AD, there was no Christian and earlier than 1433 AD, there was no Muslim. They were converted under persecution in spite of the commands of their scripture to slay the proselyte Christians and Muslims. (Bible, Deut. 13:6-11) and (Koran 4:89). Why should Hindus not kill the Christians and Muslims?

Our ancestors failed us. They did not utilize the dogmas of our enemies and slay Christians and Muslims. We seek support of this Hon’ble Court to slay these people for relinquishing their faiths as per their own dogmas?

Three: Says Tulsi’s Ram Charit Manas,

अनुज बधू भगिनी सुत नारी| सुनु सठ कन्या सम ए चारी|

इन्हहिं कुदृष्टि बिलोकइ जोई| ताहि बधें कछु पाप न होई||

राम चरित मानस, किष्किन्धाकाण्ड; ८;४

That Islam permits Muslims to marry daughter in law (Koran 33:37-38) and rape any non-Muslim woman (Koran 23:6). Jesus supports marriage of a Christian with one’s own daughter. (Bible, 1 Corinthians 7:36). Our scriptures allow slaughter for incest. As such we Vedic Panthies have religious right to kill every Christian and Muslim. We seek support of this Hon’ble Court in killing these human killers.

36.         That the perpetrators of Islamic terror and Christianity's Mission are inflamed with violent and racist doctrines, which are, 'Fight them until persecution is no more and the Religion of Allah reigns supreme.' (Koran 8:39) and “But those enemies of mine who did not want me to be king over them bring them here and kill them in front of me.” Bible, Luke, Chapter 19 Verse 27. Both have agenda, and Hindus are ignorant of it. They have been created to reduce human beings into dinosaurs. Why should we allow such Indian Constitution survive, which has provided unfettered fundamental right to Muslims and Christians to slay us as per Article 29(1) of the Indian Constitution.

37.         That Rulers, Judges, Governors, Leaders, reformers, saints, Media, Islamic and Missionary politicos and clerics are purposely deceiving humanity. The truth is not hidden, nor is it hard to find. Media is scared, clueless, and willfully ignorant at the cost of human eradication. Good Muslims and Christians would continue to wage Jihad and Mission until we stop them by eliminating their means and motivation. Means is petro dollars and Missionary funds and motivation is Koran and Bible. (Koran 8:39) and (Bible, Luke 19:27). If we don’t retaliate, they would keep on killing Humanity. Non-violence is imposed upon Aryans only through [Article 29(1) of the Indian Constitution] and Sections 196 and 197 of the Criminal Procedure Code.

38.         That Christianity and Islam are cults invented to enslave humanity. It is time to wake up and fight against these cults, as they are threat to humankind and there can be no co-existence with Muslims and Christians. As long as Muslims and Christians believe in Muhammad and Jesus, they are a threat to others and even to themselves.

39.          That the LG, Government of NCT at Delhi, fails to apprehend the danger of survival of Vedic Sanaatan Dharm and India posed by killer cultures of Christianity and Islam. However, she was quick to apprehend the incitement of communal hatred in my pamphlet ‘KIRAYA KANOON’.

40.         That to enslave bull, peasants sterilize the bull and to enslave humanity prophets Moses and Muhammad got their followers circumcised. Prophets died and left behind their legacies for clerics and rulers.

41.         That humanity is victim of the frauds and pettifoggery committed by those public servants, who are supposed to serve the people. I am quoting the ex President of USA, “"The nine most terrifying words in the English language are: "I'm from the government and I'm here to help." Ronald Reagan.”

42.         That Qaba is booty and belongs to idolater Aryans. The same be returned to Aryans after erecting 359 idols demolished by Ali. Koran 17:81. Azaan incites communal hatred, the same must be stopped and Imaams shouting Azaan must be arrested u/s 153 and 295 of the Indian Penal Code. Koran commands Muslims to slay non-Muslims as such must be proscribed at once.

43.         That our saints hold responsibility to protect Vedic Sanaatan Dharm, to which Sonia, exploiting Muslims' Islam, wants to annihilate and kill Aryans (Bible, Luke 19:27) and (Koran 8:39). Under the commands of Jagatguru Shri Amritanand, every one arrested for bomb explosions in mosques had exercised one's right of Private Defense provided by Section 102 of the Indian Penal Code. Anything done in the exercise of Private Defense is no crime as per Section 96 of the Indian Penal Code.

44.         That worse persecution was perpetrated by ATS police against our Jagatguru Shri Amritanand Ji. Beef was pushed in his mouth. Spinal cord of Sadhvi Pragya has been broken. Aseemananda was tortured. The leg of Col. Purohit was broken. We are victims of Jesuit, cow and man eater Sonia for our ignorance and want of choice for our public servants.

45.         That under 50th criminal case I am accused in Malegaon mosque blast conspiracy. We had demolished Babri structure. Nay! I had submitted affidavit in the hand of thief Manmohan Singh Librhan on Jan 15, 2001 that I alone must be tried for the demolition of the Babri structure. The affidavit was stolen by M.S. Librhan, in lieu of bribe of Rs. 10 crores from Advani and Sonia both, and is not on record.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yutaowqMtd8

46.         That we filed writ petition 15/1993 for ban of Koran in apex court. It was dismissed as withdrawn. I had published and distributed two handbills 'MUSALMANON BHARAT CHHODO' and 'ISHWAR ALLAH KAISE BNA'. 2 cases FIRs 78/1993 and 137/1993 (Ext 1, on record) were registered against me in Roop Nagar Police Station in North Delhi. I was discharged in both cases on 3rd July, 1997. I got replaced statue of Gandhi with revered Pandit Nathuram Godse on 30-01-1997. For opposing Islam, I faced trial in Press Council of India and was discharged on 25-02-2002. I have been discharged in criminal cases registered in Narela Police Station, Delhi, for opposing Azaan vides FIR No. 110/2001 on 26-02-2005 and for opposing Islam vides FIR No. 10/2001 on 04-02-2010. These two cases FIRs 440/1996 and 484/1996 are still pending with Roop Nagar Police Station for opposing Islam and another two cases FIRs 406/2003 and 166/2006 are pending with Narela Police Station for opposing Christianity and Islam. Another case FIR 127/1997 for replacing Pakpita Gandhi's statue with revered martyr Nathuram Godse is also pending with Roop Nagar Police Station. For details Hon’ble Court may peruse my following blogs,

http://aaryavrt.blogspot.com/2007/04/judgment-on-azaan.html

http://aaryavrt.blogspot.com/2007/04/judgment-of-pci.html

http://aaryavrt.blogspot.com/2007/09/constitution-supports-genocide-of.html

http://aaryavrt.blogspot.com/2007/09/conversion-is-crime-with-human-races.html

http://aaryavrt.blogspot.com/2007/08/repatriation-of-qaba.html

http://aaryavrt.blogspot.com/2007/08/ahimsa-non-violence-impossible.html

47.         That we seek Hon’ble Court’s support to retaliate. If Hon’ble Court fails to support us, humanity would finish like dinosaurs. Annexure-s10

http://ikashmir.net/templesdestroyed/4.html

Foundation of fraud

48.         That Aryavrt Government is alone that is opposing both dreaded cultures and regimens of Christianity and Islam. This is a big task and we need huge funds for protection of human race. If one wishes to survive, may join Vedic Panth and support Aryavrt Government, else keep ready for doom.

49.         That Muslims and Jews may note! Vedic culture is their Buffer. They are alive because Vedic culture could not be eradicated. No sooner Vedic culture would be eradicated their Allah and Jehovah would be eradicated by Christians within short time. Muslims and Christians may relinquish their criminal faiths if they wish to protect human race.

a.     That we, Aryans, are non-believing people. Rulers and judges are left without choice. They have to take oath to preserve, protect and defend, uphold and depose faith in the very Article 29(1) of the Indian Constitution and laws of land. Commander-in-Chief of army - President Pranab Dada of hapless India and his Governors has taken oath to preserve, protect and defend the predator and pirate Indian Constitution. [(Articles 60 and 159 of the Indian Constitution)]. All are puppets of Sonia. So long as the Indian Constitution, Koran and Bible survive, human race cannot survive.

http://shourie.bhara​tvani.org/articles/a​mbedkar.htm)

-----------------------

Constituent Assembly Debates, Vol. VIII, pp. 269-355

 “On 28 August 1947 Sardar Patel again spoke to the Constituent Assembly replying to the amendment motions moved in the Constituent Assembly in favour of separate electorates and reservation on the basis of religions:You have got a separate State and remember, you are the people who were responsible for it, and not those who remain in Pakistan. You led the agitation. You got it. What is it that you want now?... You got the partition and now again you tell me and ask me to say for the purpose of securing the affection of the younger brother that I must agree to the same thing again, to divide the country again in the divided part. For God’s sake, understand that we have also got some sense. …”

50.         That on the one hand one has so called democracy of Briton's Congress and on the other hand Aryavrt Kingdom. In the so called democracy even Christian and Muslim, who are slaves, citizens cannot have their own regimen, property and capital [Indian Constitution, DIRECTIVE PRINCIPLES OF STATE POLICY, Article 39(c) and cannot worship a god of one’s choice (Azaan and Koran 3:19) read with Article 29(1) of the Indian Constitution. Aryavrt Government undertakes to provide even Christian and Muslim citizens freedom of faith (Gita 7:21) and Right to Property (Manusmriti 8:308). We, the activists of Aryavrt Government and Abhinav Bharat are fighting total war against two criminal cultures, viz. Christianity and Islam.

The fundamental Right to Property provided vide Article 31 of the Indian Constitution could not be snatched even by the Britons and the Constitution Committee. This Article 31 was amended by the dacoit Parliamentarians and upheld by the apex Court. Now the Article has been omitted from the Constitution since 20-06-1979.

Democracy, Islam and Christianity are fraud against humanity and they must go.

51.         That with the compilation of the dreaded predator and pirate Indian Constitution, Christians and Muslims has been granted unfettered fundamental right to conserve their cultures. Citizens of India have lost their right of life and liberty of faith vides Article 29(1) and right upon their properties and means of production vides Article 39(c) since November 26, 1949. Election Commission extorts citizens’ consent of losing their right of life and property. No worship place and culture can survive. [ (Bible Deut. 12:1-3) and (Koran, Bani Israel, 17:81)]. The property right, provided to the citizens vides Article 31 of the Indian Constitution, which could not be snatched even by Britons and constitution committee was snatched through the first amendment of the Indian Constitution, by the dreaded parliament. The chastity, honour and dignity of no woman are safe. (Bible, Isaiah 13:15 and 16) (Koran 4:24; 23:6; 33:50 and 70:30).

52.         That the sorry state of affair is that one does not feel horrified that one has been reduced to sheep of such a blatant criminal cow and man eater Jesus and Zimmi of Allah. Sheep keep no family and wear no clothes. Accordingly girls are relinquishing their clothes. We want to abolish the immunity granted to Imams under section 196 of the Criminal Procedure Code. Mosques are broadcasting stations for inciting hatred. We are bombing mosques for our private defense under sections 102 and 105 of the Indian Penal Code. Aryavrt Government is trying her best to eradicate Christianity and Islam. Both have been detained in India to annihilate Vedic Sanaatan Dharm. In lieu of abusing one’s faith and Ishwar, through Azaan, the apex court has issued writ to pay salaries to Imaams amounting to Rs. 10,000 crores annually. (AIR 1993 SUPREME COURT 2086). A copy of the judgment is being attached with this WRITTEN ARGUMENT and is marked as (Annexure-s2).

 http://www.esamskriti.com/essay-chapters/Supreme-Court-asks-Government-to-pay-Imam-salaries-1.aspx

53.         That depose faith in Jehovah (Bible, Isaiah 13:15 and 16) ravish any alien women of your choice and depose faith in Allah (Koran, 23:6 and 70:30) rape any alien women of your choice and remain scot-free. No sooner one converts into either in Islam, or Judaism, or Christianity or Socialism, the criminal activities of murder, plunder and rape of women ceased to be considered crimes instead these crimes turn into the source of sustenance and heaven after death.

54.         That Secular Allah of Hamid Ansari, the Vice President of India, boasts for being a terrorist {(Koran 8:12) and killer (Koran 8:17)} and permits incest (Koran 33:37-38). Secular Allah claims that he deceives humanity, (Koran 9:3) assassinates humanity, (Koran 9:5) slays humanity, (Koran 8:17) dupes humanity, ambushes humanity, (Koran 9:3) robs humanity, (Koran 8:1) condones rape of women, (Koran 23:6) enslaves women, Children, and even his own worshippers, commits murder, (Koran 8:17) genocide, (Koran 8:39) sadistic tortures, terrorism, warmongering, (Koran 2:216; 8:65 and 67) etc. on the pretext that one does not worship Allah alone. Which freedom of faith, the preamble of the Indian Constitution promises?

55.         That in fact, the Koran and Bible were written to justify some of the most ungodly and immoral behaviors the world has ever known. Allah's good Muslim is a Jihadist i.e. crusader of Islam, a man who leaves his home, sacrificing his wealth and life, fighting in Allah’s Cause. (Koran, 8:72). That cause is destroying all faiths save Islam. (Koran 8:39). Look! This is secularism. Democrats say, "This is peaceful coexistence and religious tolerance!" Allah says they will be rewarded with stolen booty (Koran, 8:1 and 41) and women to rape (Koran, 23:6) of the victim/s, if they survive or with a heavenly BROTHEL (Koran, 37:47-49 and 76:19-21) if they die. Bad Muslims, on the other hand, are peaceful. Allah calls them “hypocrites” because they are unwilling to fight. (Koran, 3:167). He (Allah) even says that peaceful Muslims are “the vilest of creatures” and that hell’s hottest fires await them. [Koran 16:70] If you are a peace-loving Muslim, may note, your Allah hates you, because you fail to murder, plunder and rape. You Muslims have no shame that you submit to dreaded incest monger, (Koran 33:37-38) assassin and robber Allah. (Koran, 8:1 and 17).

Servility

56.         That I feel pity for the Public servants, who are hired criminals of Democracy. The Indian Constitution converts them into criminals. The rulers of the world need dominance and booty. For the very purpose, the so called prophets, who were otherwise scoundrels, fabricated criminal gods and established themselves intermediaries to their gods. These notorious frauds named prophets have fabricated new ways of making the whole humanity their slaves irrespective of faith. These prophets have converted even their own followers, into their slaves for they have made their brainchildren gods unapproachable. The books named Bible and Koran of these gods have been compiled to justify the most ungodly behaviour the world has ever known. Qaba and Vetican are booty. Azaan is blasphemy of the faiths and deities of non Muslims. Azaan incites communal hatred and strife on the basis of religion. Azaan is offence and attracts action under section 153/295 of the Indian Penal Code. The Article 29(1) of the Indian Constitution and section 196 of the Criminal Procedure Code has condoned Muslim Imaams from action u/s 153 or 295 of the Indian Penal Code.

57.         That God of Prophets is criminal of a class. Although one has three forums against even dreaded criminal like Doud Ibrahim viz. Society, police and judiciary, one has no forum to complain against gods!

58.         That if those worshipping other gods save Allah were killed, (Koran, the Prophets 21:98) why Muslims, who worship criminal Allah be not killed? If those worshipping other gods than jealous Jehovah be killed, (Bible Exodus/ Chapter 20 / The Ten Commandments/ Verses 3 and 5) why those worshipping Jehovah and his alone son Jesus be not killed? These slaughters have advantage for humanity. These provide right to property (Manusmriti 8:308) and liberty of faith (Gita 7:21) to human race and save honour and dignity of women. (Bible, Isaiah 13:15 and 16) (Koran 4:24; 23:6; 33:50 and 70:30).

59.         That Does one know as to who were Vyas, Valmiki and Vishwamitra? Still Brahmins revere them. We Brahmins have accepted Gautam Buddha incarnation of Vishnu and recite it in our SANKALPA before performing SANDHYA thrice a day. We are blamed for untouchability for reasons of infections. A syringe of 1 MM causes infection and refusing eating in 300 MM plate attracts crime vides Article 17 of the Indian Constitution. I have a question. Can one eat with one’s own hand without washing his hand after toilet? Does one know the consequence? In absence of cleanliness Red Indians were devoured through Christians' created epidemics like plague, small pox etc. These epidemics were injected in India too during British rule. However, due to Aryans' long cherished cleanliness habits, Aryans survived. Now, when these epidemics would be injected now, it would devour Aryans easily. This is the worst contribution of Pakpita Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi. Look! Observing cleanliness attracts hatred between lower class and upper class, however, commands of genocide by Jesus and Allah (Bible, Luke 19:27) and (Koran 8:17) do not attract hatred in the very lower class! I have a schedule caste friend named Pradeep Gautam. Gautam is his Gotra. My maternal family, I mean my Nanihal, belong to Gautam Mishra of Saryupari clan of Brahmins. How Brahmins, practicing hatred with scheduled castes, allowed Pradeep remain Gautam? Do these Jews, Christians and Muslims know their ancestors or their native culture/ basic religion? Would these Jews, Christians and Muslims, whose ancestors were persecuted by criminal faiths, not take revenge from Judaism, Christianity and Islam? Are these Christians and Muslims not abusing their ancestors? How those, who cannot respect their own ancestors, would respect humanity? Can they bring fraternity? Why should these people be not killed for relinquishing their faiths and accepting servility as per their own dogmas? As per their own scriptures viz. Koran and Bible, they must be hanged till death.

60.         That has we Aryans ever called for jihad against ardent Muslims? Have we said anywhere that Muslims should recant their faith, pay jizyah (protection money), else they should be killed? Where is imposition from us? Muslims fail to see that Muhammad imposed his diabolic faith on others through his numerous ghazwas (raids), that human beings were massacred, raped and forced into conversion, but Muslims see opposition against Azaan and mosque as imposition? If a Muslim does not want our idols, why should we allow our Qaba remain with them? Can a Muslim, who does not want to remain a Muslim click out of his faith? What will happen to him if he does? (Koran 4:89, 5:101 & 102). Where is the touted freedom of faith guaranteed in the Indian and American Constitution as well as 'Universal Declaration of Human Rights'? Can non-Muslims living in Islamic countries practice their faith freely? Have Muslims read about the recent violence against the Copts in Egypt? Have Muslims heard of innocent Muslims in Pakistan accused of blasphemy, who are lynched by Muslim goons as well as awarded death sentence for blasphemy? 

61.         That now one may compare Ishwar with these Gods! While Jehovah has two brokers named Moses and Jesus, Allah has one alone named Muhammad? Anyone can meet Ishwar direct after performing Yoga or Kundalini Jagran. Ishwar has no broker. (Gita 7:21). No one can meet Jehovah and Allah. So why should one worship these impotent and criminal gods named Jehovah and Allah who make one slave, instigate one for murder, plunder, incest and rape of women of alien faiths and forbid one from worshipping a god of one’s choice, in lieu of Ishwar, who gives one unfettered right to worship any god of one’s choice?

62.         That I agree with Daniel Webster who said, "There is no nation on earth powerful enough to accomplish our overthrow. Our destruction, should it come at all, will be from another quarter. From the inattention of the people to the concerns of their government, from their carelessness and negligence. ... I fear that they may place too implicit a confidence in their public servants... they may be made the dupes of designing men and become the instruments of their own undoing."

63.         That while humanity is fighting relentless war for liberty, public servants, Jews, Christians, Muslims, and most human races have no shame that they have voluntarily relinquished their liberty, wisdom and manhood in lieu of booty and sex. (Koran, 8:1, 69 and 41), (Bible, Isaiah 13:16) and {(Bible, Genesis 2:17) and (Koran 2:35)}. They have no shame that they are becoming human bombs and fighting to retain their servilities of Jehovah, Jesus, Allah, rulers, clerics, dead Socialists, Communists and Democrats. Jehovah, Jesus, Allah, rulers, clerics, dead Socialists, Communists and Democrats has snatched the very instinct for liberty from their followers. Look! Still Jews, Christians and Muslims do not feel sorry that they are getting cheated, corrupted and humiliated by their so-called merciful Allah, Jesus, Jehovah, clerics and rulers. They are happily defending their servilities in lieu of booty and sex. Clerics/ rulers are rewarding both Muslims and Christians for relinquishing their liberty. Tell me, why is judiciary not reviving liberty of citizens?

What did judiciary do yet?

64.         That Allahabad High Court could not get her own orders dated 28th July, 1989 and 9th Aug, 1989 passed in CMWP 9672/1988 executed and cannot punish revenue staff for interpolation of records. Judiciary cannot punish executives i.e. dictator proletariat for violation of their own orders. This situation is due to the Section 197 of CrPC quoted above. In fact every government servant has been posted to steal the possessions of the citizens of India as per the constitutional obligation imposed upon them by the State Governors. So long as these public servants, working on behalf of Governors, extort money under duress and pass the share of the booty to Sonia alias Antonia, the Governors cannot grant sanction for prosecution u/s 197. When public servants fail to extort & share the booty, their assets become disproportionate to their known source of income. Accordingly, Governors immediately grant sanction. A copy of the orders is being attached with this WRITTEN ARGUMENT and is marked as (Annexure-s3)

http://www.aryavrt.com/anna-dares-corruption

65.         That humanity failed to understand that Judiciary has nothing to do with justice. 'Justice' is the first casualty in judiciary. By default Judiciary has to uphold the Indian Constitution and Law. The Indian Constitution has been compiled to eradicate Vedic Sanaatan Dharm. [THIRD SCHEDULE OF THE Indian Constitution, Form IV and VIII read with Article 29(1) of the Indian Constitution]. How can Judiciary deviate from her own oath?

66.         That whoever takes oath of the dreaded predator and pirate Indian Constitution, literally accepts that Aryans, nick named as Hindus by Muslims, meaning ‘the resident of Hindustan, thief, robber, slave, black’ and by Christians as barbaric invaders, who came from middle Asia, cannot have any nation. Aryans' civilization is savage. Vedic culture must be replaced either with Islamic or Christian culture. Aryans' Vedic culture is caste based barbaric culture that exploits poor and low caste persons on the ground of caste. Krishna among Aryans Gods is killer, thief, sexy, assassin and cheat. However, Jesus, who snatches manhood from his followers to reduce them into sheep, whose father Jehovah commands Christians to dash infants to pieces, rape women of non Christians before the eyes of the men of victim women, (Bible, Isaiah 13:16) commands Christians to slay those, who do not accept Jesus their king, (Bible, Luke 19:27), who supports marriage with daughter (Bible, 1 Corinthians 7:36), who came on the earth to bring fire (Bible, Luke 12:49) and sword (Bible, Matt 10:34) and who came on the earth to divide every Christian family (Bible, Matt 10:35) and (Bible, Luke 12:51-53), is kind and peace loving God. Similarly, Allah, who slays (Koran 8:17), supports incest (Koran 33:37-38), owns and distributes booty (Koran, 8:1, 69 and 41) and condones rape of women (Koran 23:6) is merciful god.

67.         That while both Christians and Muslims have been commanded by their secular gods to slay those who proselyte, (Bible, Deut. 13:6-11) and (Koran 4:89), have right to convert Hindus. They call it liberty of faith. They reduced north eastern States into Hindu minority through conversion. They are running parallel Governments in Nagaland. They hounded Riyangs out of their homes in Mizoram and got peace prizes.

68.         That Azaan that incites communal hatred on the ground of religion is secular worship. Veds, Upnishads, Ramayan, Mahaabhaarat are lores of shepherds. They burnt libraries of Taxshila and Nalnda. They yearn that these books be destroyed. Nay! Bible and Koran have been granted immunity by the Judiciary. (AIR 1985 CALCUTTA HIGH COURT, 104).

69.         That Ram, Krishna etc. are imagined characters. They were never born on the earth. The followers of Ram, Krishna etc. are Barbaric and savage people. In the interest of religious harmony, they must be slain. Idolaters and those, who do not accept Jesus their king, must be slain, (Koran, 9:5) beheaded, (Koran, 9:111) tortured, (Koran 8:12) insulted, (Azaan and Koran 21:98) condemned, (Koran, 17:18) stolen from, (Koran, 8:1, 69 and 41) deceived, (Koran, 4:142) captured, (Koran 4:24) humiliated (Koran, 9:29) and on and on. The Hadith and Sira follow in the same vein. There is no word in the English language that has the negativity of the word kafir. (Bible, Luke 19:27).

70.         That temples and idols are satanic symbols. This is because from temples, Hindus recite ‘DHRM KI JAI HO. ADHRM KA NASH HO. PRANIYON ME SADBHAVNA HO. VISHVA KA KALYAN HO’ as such temples must be destroyed. (Bible Deut. 12:1-3) and (Koran, Bani Israel, 17:81 and The Prophets, 21:58). Those, who worship idols and their temples, must be slain. (Bible, Exodus/ Chapter 20 / The Ten Commandments/ Verses 3 and 5 and Luke 19:27). However, mosques are secular worship places. This is because from here Imams broadcasts ‘ALLAH ALONE CAN BE WORSHIPPED. PERSECUTION (WORSHIP OF OTHER GODS SAVE ALLAH) IS WORSE THAN SLAUGHTER. (Koran 2:191). SLAY KAFIRS. (KORAN 8:17), Public servants have been deputed to insure protection of mosques and churches and demolition of temples.

Election is fraud.

Duty of judiciary, President of India and Governors

71.           That as long as public servants, Muslims and Christians slay Aryans, nicknamed as Hindus, usurp Aryans properties, kidnap Aryans women and rape them, shout Azaan on loud speakers, demolish Aryans' worship places, assassinate Soldiers, demand Kashmir and Nagaland, Muslims and Christians get peace prizes. In lieu of abusing one, one’s faith, one’s Ishwar and one’s culture and inciting communal hatred and ill will, while judges cannot even take cognizance of the offence committed by Muslim Imaams, for want of sanction under section 196 CrPC, the Indian judiciary issued writ to give Rs 10,000 crores (Rs 10 billion) towards salaries to Imams of mosques and Rs 400 crores (Rs 0.4 billion) as Hajj subsidies, in violation of Article 27 of the Indian Constitution. Apex Court upheld it. (Annexure-s11). Section 196 of the CrPC is being used by Governors as arm to protect Muslims and Christians to liquidate Vedic culture and eliminate Aryans.

72.         That I am quoting Fallaci, a renowned journalist from her book, "In 1974 [Algerian President] Boumedienne, the man who ousted Ben Bella three years after Algerian independence, spoke before the General Assembly of the UN. And without circumlocutions he said: ‘One day millions of men will leave the southern hemisphere of this planet to burst into the northern one. But not as friends. Because they will burst in to conquer, and they will conquer by populating it with their children. Victory will come to us from the wombs of our [(looted and raped) (Koran 23:6)] women.’ "

73.         That the Islamic prime Minister of Turkey Erdogan clearly and loudly said “The Mosques are (not worship places) our barracks, the Domes are helmets, the Minarets are Bayonets and the faithful are soldiers.” Erdogan’s vision of Islam is the same as that of Bin-Laden, Colonel Khadafy, Mullah Omar, Imam Yavalaki, Al-Zwahiri, Ayatollah Khomeini and the Saudi King, who awarded the Islamic Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan “The King Faisal International prize for service to Islam.”

74.         That Government protects Muslims' and Christians' crimes committed under sections 153 and 295 IPC. No court can take cognizance for the crimes committed by Muslims and Christians, no police can register FIR against Muslims and Christians and no one can sue without sanction u/s 196 of CrPC. No sooner, their Koran, Bible and the predator Indian Constitution is quoted, the Governments get horrified. Sanction u/s 196 is immediately granted. In the impugned case, it is not that the quotations are not in Bible and Koran, but my crime is exposing the danger these books have posed upon humanity and of the conspiracy of Governments to eradicate Vedic culture.

What happened with judges, who opposed Islam?

75.         That after passing order against Koran, MM ZS Lohat of Tishazari Court resigned.

76.         That after refusal to withdraw the case against Ahmed Bukhari, who burnt the Indian Constitution, the current Imam of Zama Masjid, the Delhi High Court closed the trial. (Annexure-s5a).

http://intellibriefs.blogspot.in/2005/02/imam-and-shankaracharya-not-rule-of.html

77.         That when MM MS Rohilla, issued NBW against Imam Abdullah Bukhari, he resigned from his services. Annexure-s4

http://www.partitionofindia.com/_archive/000004e2.htm

78.         That even Hon’ble ACMM may lose her job, if she fails to punish me.

79.         That I am telling these things, because I know that my days are numbered. I am already of 80 years. It makes me happy if I die at once instead of facing death at every moment. I feel pity for judges as they are digging their own graves for the compulsion of their power, pelf and sustenance. What would the judges give in legacy to their descendents?

80.         That the official English Koran bears the stamp of the Fahd Foundation. It writes, in foot-note, below surah 2:190, “Jihad is holy fighting in Allah’s Cause with full force of numbers and weaponry. It is given the utmost importance in Islam and is one of its pillars. By Jihad, Islam is established, Allah’s Word is made superior (which means only Allah has the right to be worshiped), and Islam is propagated. By abandoning Jihad, Islam is destroyed and Muslims fall into an inferior position; their honor is lost, their lands are stolen, their rule and authority vanish. Jihad is an obligatory duty in Islam on every Muslim. He, who tries to escape from this duty, dies with one of the qualities of a hypocrite.”

81.         That Good Muslims are those, who read Islam’s scriptures the guide of criminals named secular Koran and secular Hadith, planned, funded, staffed, executed, and celebrated the terrorist attacks of 11th September, 2001 upon World Trade Centre and July 7, 2005 serial bombing upon London public transport systems. They proudly told the world about their plan — terrorize the human beings into submission and compel them to relinquish human's long cherished instinct for liberty. (Koran, 8:12 and 13). Muslims boldly proclaimed why they were going to do it—for the eradication of non-Islamic faiths. (Koran, 8:39). Muslims even told us who good Muslims were? But, Kafir non-Muslims ignored their announcements for fear of their slaughter for blasphemy.

82.         That the vast preponderance of ignorant Jews, Christians and Muslims do not know their prophet or their religion. They lead a life of ignorance, despair, tyranny, and mind-numbing rituals. They are kept in the dark, purposely deceived, for the benefit of clerics and kings. There is no incentive for Muslims and Christians to learn. Even if exposed to the truth, they would not reject Islam (Koran 4:89) or Jesus (Bible, Deut. 13:6-11) for fear of their lives. The Koran and Bible themselves confirm this startling reality. (5:101 and 102). Allah commanded Muslims “not to question the Koran,” for those who did, he said, “discarded their religion.”

83.         That Islam and Christianity has nothing to do with citizens' protection, peace, love or salvation. Both have no alibi and no reason to cry for their unfair deeds. While Koran condemns equally all non-Muslims, Christians and Jews as well as those, who worship any god save Allah, Bible of Christianity condemns all non-Christians. Islam and Christianity are equal opportunity haters and warmongers. Their attitudes toward aliens are overwhelmingly hostile. For relatively few nice verses, relatively more verses contradict, replace, and “abrogate” these verses. Confronted with truth, they come with excuse of parables. When opportunity comes, these parables become commands.

84.         That the simple truth is: good Muslims and Christians are bad people. Islam and Christianity convert them in to criminals. While there are plenty of “bad” Muslims and Christians, who are good people, they are as impotent as bad Nazis of Germany during Hitler’s era or bad Communists during Stalin’s era. The Koran and Bible define good and bad Muslims and Christian for us.

The reasons for granting incentives

Think for human races.

85.         That even election is not for the rescue of citizens, because no voter can change either Article 29(1) or 39(c) or claim restoration of Article 31 of the Indian Constitution. Thus, one votes to decide as to who would plunder the subjects, whether Atal or Mulayam or Rahul or Antonia Maino alias Sonia Gandhi or Mayavati? Citizens vote to agree as to under whose regimen one's properties would be usurped, one's women would be raped and one would be slain!

86.         Human races have three prevailing preconditions for their survival:

Condition No. 1:

87.         That only those can survive, who worship Allah alone. (Azaan and Koran 21:98). One, who worships other god, must be slain, one's lands and properties must be looted and one's women must be raped. (Koran 8:69 and 23:6). These are divine commands. It is secularism. One, who opposes secularism, Azaan and Koran goes to jail u/s 153 or 295 of the Indian Penal Code with the sanction of either President, or Governor or District Collector u/s 196 of the Criminal Procedure Code. I had been in lockups and jail for 42 times since 1993 for opposing killer Azaan, Koran and Bible. The conservation of Koran and Bible culture has to be defended by the President of India as well as all the State Governors by oath. (Articles 60 and 159 of the Indian Constitution) [Article 29(1) of the Indian Constitution]. For their (rulers) sustenance, power and pelf, judges, legislatures, Governors etc. have no choice than upholding their (Muslims' and Christians') fundamental rights mentioned above. (Article 60, 159 and Schedule III of the dreaded predator and pirate Indian Constitution.). Judiciary has condoned Muslims from action u/s 153 or 295 of the Indian Penal Code. No court can sit into judgment against Koran and Bible. (AIR 1985 CALCUTTA HIGH COURT, 104). Nay! Muslim Imaams and Maulavies are getting salaries amounting to more than Rs. 10000 crores in lieu of abusing Ishwar and Vedic culture in violation of Article 27 of the Indian Constitution. The Indian Constitution has compelled the Indian Judiciary to accept Jehovah and Allah Gods, Bible and Koran religious books, mosques and churches worship places and Azaan call for prayer. (AIR 1985 CALCUTTA HIGH COURT, 104). Citizens are celebrating 15th August 1947, viz. the day of rape of their women, hounding them out of their mother land, vivisection of their motherland and plunder of their ancestral properties by secular and peace loving Muslims on the command of their dreaded Satan Allah, on the instance of pimp Mountbatten, who delivered his wife Advina to Jawahar Lal Nehru in lieu of cheating Aryans. Citizens are celebrating the doomsday viz. Jan. 26 since 1950, the day on which they lost their right to property, [Article 39(c) of the Indian Constitution and omitted Article 31], right of life, faith, culture and nation. [Article 29(1) of the Indian Constitution]. Has any person courage to protest the presence of such violent and murderous rulers in Bharat?

Condition No. 2:

88.         That only those can survive, who accept Jesus their king. (Bible, Luke 19:27) read with Article 29(1) of the Indian Constitution. This, again, is divine command and secularism. One, who opposes secularism and Bible, goes to jail u/s 153 or 295 of the Indian Penal Code with the sanction of either President, or Governor or District Collector u/s 196 of the Criminal Procedure Code. I had been in lockups and jail for 42 times since 1993 for opposing Azaan, Koran and Bible. Its conservation has to be defended by the President of India as well as all the State Governors by oath. [Article 29(1) of the Indian Constitution read with Articles 60 and 159 of the Indian Constitution] For sustenance, power and pelf a legislature and high court and apex court judge has to depose faith and allegiance in the dreaded predator and pirate Indian Constitution. Judiciary has condoned Christians from action u/s 153 or 295 of the Indian Penal Code. No court can sit into judgment against Bible. (AIR 1985 CALCUTTA HIGH COURT, 104). Nay! Christian Government of Mizoram got peace prize in lieu of genocide of Riangs and hounding Riangs out of Mizoram in violation of Article 27 of the Indian Constitution.

Condition No. 3:

89.         That no citizen can have assets, capital, land, industries, gold and mines. It has been wasted into the State since November 26, 1949 vides Article 39(c) of the Indian Constitution. Although UOI has opted open economy since 1992, the Constitutional stipulation prevails. Moreover, the status does not discriminate between Aryans and non Aryans.

90.         That literally the dead socialism is excuse fabricated by robbers and thugs to usurp the possessions of haves.

Why Judaism, Christianity, Islam and Communism/Socialism are fabricated?

91.         That one should never believe and never accept religious servility for sex, booty and slave. Come to my fold and I would provide you liberty to worship a God of your own choice, says Ishwar in Gita, See Chapter 7 Shloka 21.

92.         That for protection from exploitation humanity invented their Sardars (Folk leaders). During this era, man was owner of his land, produce and had liberty of worship. When kings came, they snatched lands from the citizens. Liberty of worship and right to property was still there. When Prophets came, they snatched lands, ladies, labours, liberties and lives of aliens. Nay! The prophets snatched liberty of worship from one and all.

93.         That the notorious democracy calls this status of servility, liberty of faith and secularism! Therefore, the suggestion to these followers of criminal prophets is to relinquish their prophets and come into the fold of great and omnipresent Vedic culture.

94.         That 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 money is being siphoned off by Sonia and her tools and vassals?

95.         That the answer to the present situation is abolition of the Article 29(1) and Article 39(c), revival of Article 31 of the Indian Constitution and abolition of section 197 of the Criminal Procedure Code.

96.         That Aryavrt Government has been founded to revive moral values of human race. Support Aryavrt Government and join Vedic Panth if one wishes to survive with honour and dignity. Live and let live others. You have no choice.

97.         That we are innovative people of India. Aryavrt Government and Abhinav Bharat have the audacity to ask why Christianity and Islam should survive on the earth. This is the big adventure that we have formed Aryavrt government. Thus, we challenged the Sonia's Rome Rajya. Like Banda Bairagi, Ten Gurus of Sikhs, Guru Gobind Singh's sons, brothers Mati and Sati Das, we are being persecuted by Sonia. The worse thing is that today, we are not being tortured by Muslims, but by those people for protecting whose life, culture, property and women, we are fighting.

Scramble for Booty

98.         That there is scramble for booty and slaves around the whole world. Vedic Morals, which provide right to properties (Manusmriti 8:308) and freedom of faith (Gita 7:21) are stumbling-blocks. Therefore, Christianity and Islam have been detained in India with special rights, preservation, protection and defense vides Article 29(1) of the Indian Constitution and section 196 of the Criminal Procedure Code. As per the Indian Constitution and laws there is no law to conserve Vedic Sanaatan Dharm. Moses, the founder of immorality on the pretext of religion, was the first person who moralized Booty, (Bible Deut. 20:14), rape of women (Bible Isaiah 13:15-16) and subjugation of humanity through his religion Judaism and his domestic servant Jehovah on the pretext of ban on worshipping alien gods. (Bible Exodus/ Chapter 20 / The Ten Commandments/ Verses 3 and 5). Jesus, a pirate, improved the booty further. He moralized eating flesh of the son of man and drinking his blood (Bible, John 6:53) and slaughter of one who does not accept Jesus his ruler. (Bible, Luke, 19:27). Muhammad, another pirate, made Allah the owner of booty, (Koran 8:01, 41 and 69) killer of non-Muslims, (Koran 8:17) rapist of women (Koran 4:24; 23:6; 33:50 and 70:30) and owner of the world. (Koran 2:255). Still Jesus and Muhammad provided limited right of booty to their followers. Property is power. Remaining in the hands of citizens, property prevents their subjugation and servitude. Therefore, Carl Marx invested property into the immoral, corrupt and usurper society. Democracy is blend of all above to eradicate Vedic culture and enslave one. Thus, Liberty is snatched by Judaism, Christianity, Islam and Communism/Socialism.

99.         That Imaams begin abusing judges after rising from bed until going to bed. Hatred is the foundation of Islam. Judges cannot oppose! A copy of Azaan propagated from mosques by Imaams and Qaba being booty is being attached with this reply and is marked as Annexure-s8.

http://www.aryavrt.com/azaaneng

100.    That judges are slaves of Christianity and Islam by the virtue of the dreaded predator and pirate Indian Constitution. [Article 29(1) of the Indian Constitution]. Slaves have no civil rights. Humanity is fighting protracted war for liberty. USA, U.K. and India promises liberty. However, judges have relinquished their liberty in lieu of sustenance, power and pelf. Judges have no shame?

101.    That, good democrats are seculars. They take oath, defend and depose faith and allegiance in the dreaded predator and pirate Indian Constitution. They abet aid, harbor and instigate Muslims and Christians to slay non-Muslims for the non-Muslims worship other gods than Allah and humanity for they do not accept Jesus their king. They extort booty from the citizens to share with President Pranab Dada and super PM Antonia. They insure eradication of Vedic culture and rape of their women before their own eyes. They vivisect Bharat on the secular basis and still claim it unity and integrity of the nation.

102.    That the legion of commentators, who portray Islam as a religion of peace, hijacked by Muslim Mujahids, may have close study that shows the same a sheer nonsense. This nonsense, however, leads gullible men think that the Jihadi attacks upon people are merely an Islamic reaction to Governments policy in India and in the Middle East in general, and to its allegedly pro-Aryan stance vis-a-vis the Kashmeres in particular. This apologetic view of Islam is actually fatal for human race.

103.    That sex and booty are incentives that attract conversion to reduce one slave of prophets. Remove both from Judaism, Christianity and Islam, these faiths would vanish.

104.    That we seek your support to retaliate. If you fail to support humanity would finish like dinosaurs.

105.    That Eradication of human race is imminent. Human race has lost wisdom. A Government that extorts taxes over 17% of the produce is extortionist. (Manusmriti 8:308). A religion that snatches liberty of worship cannot be secular. (Koran, 2:191-194 and 8:39) and (Bible, Luke 19:27). The words, "Public Interest" and "Social Justice" are weapons to usurp the belongings of the haves. The end payers of corporate tax, VAT and even Income tax are poor people. The public servants, industrialists and traders are being forced to loot the poor and pass the booty to the rulers. (In the instant case Sonia). If one says that the tax is used for the welfare of poor, one is patently wrong. Bofor Chor Rajiv Gandhi, the so-called Mr. clean, had already told the nation in 1985 that 85% money of exchequer was being siphoned off by the intermediaries during his tenure. Now the position has further deteriorated. As per his son Rahul only 5% reaches the people. Look! Poor Jehovah has no share in booty. Poor Allah takes 20% only. (Koran 8:41). However, Pranab Dada and thief Antonia Maino and their tools and vassals gallop 95% of the exchequer as per the admission of the ex PM and his son Rahul of this dreaded Democracy!

106.    That the total time for annihilation might take centuries, but once Christianity and Islam are ascendant they never fail. The host culture disappears and becomes extinct. Where is the Maya culture of red Indians of USA? What has happened with them? What has happened with the Parsis and their religion Zoroastrianism? What happened to Pagans? Hindus would face extinction in the similar way, unless Christianity and Islam are eradicated.

107.    That in India, one has right of private defence provided by Section 102 of the Indian Penal Code. Anything done in the exercise of Private Defense is no crime as per Section 96 of the Indian Penal Code. Therefore, every citizen has right to slay every Imaam.

108.    That Secularism and Multiculturalism is bankrupt against Judaism's, Christianity's & Islam's demand for every civilization to submit. {Azaan, (Koran, 2:191-194 and 8:39) and (Bible, Exodus/ Chapter 20 / The Ten Commandments/ Verses 3 and 5 and Luke 19:27)}. If ‘Allah alone can be worshipped’, where is liberty promised in the Indian Constitution? Where is multiculturalism? The culture of tolerance collapses in the face of the sacred intolerance of dualistic ethics. Intellectuals respond by ignoring the failure. Muslims and Christians must relinquish their Christianity and Islam, discard their cultures of hate and join the rest of humankind as fellow humans, or non-Muslims and non-Christians must separate themselves from them, ban Christianity and Islam, end the immigration of Muslims and Christians and slay those, who plot against humanity and refuse to integrate. Christianity and Islam are incompatible with humanity and morality. These are warring creeds {(Koran 2:216 and 8:65) and (Bible, Matt 10:34 and Luke 12:49)} that use democracy to destroy humanity and to establish itself as a worldwide dictatorship. The only way to avert the clash between this barbarity and civilization and a world disaster, is to expose the fallacies of Christianity and Islam and demystify them. Muslims and Christians must be weaned from Christianity and Islam for humanity to live in peace. Aryavrt Government is here to do it. Support us.

109.    That Muslims and Jews must thank Vedic culture for their survival. They are alive, because Vedic culture could not be eradicated. No sooner, Vedic culture would be eradicated; Jews and Muslims would be eradicated within short time. This is because of the fact that with all his might the so-called supreme Allah could not supersede Muslims over Christians' population. Even in Science, technology, arms and deception, Muslims are far behind than Christians. 27 Islamic countries could not defeat small Israel. How would they protect themselves from Christians? Now Muslims are scared for the US occupation upon Iraq and Afghanistan. How would they protect their Islamic countries on the face of the commands of Jesus to slay those, who do not accept Jesus their king? (Bible, Luke 19:27). Muslim historians proudly tell us as to how many women were sold in Baghdad market and how many women were raped by Muhammad, after robbing and killing their near and dear. However, no sooner Serbs raped Muslim women and returned pregnant Muslims' women to Muslims and when Israel killed civilians in Lebanon, Muslims cried for violation of human rights. Do non-Muslims have no human rights? The worst threat is to the women of Aryans and those dictator proletariats, who are neither Muslims nor Christians. It goes to reflect another important stupidity of Muslim (Koran 23:6) and Christian (Bible, Isaiah 13:16) women, who are breeding their own enemies as well as enemies of human race.

110.    That until 1835 A.D., Macaulay could not find a single thief or beggar in whole Bharat. Bastard Jesus was ruling and is still ruling India, through Sonia, the thief, cow and man eater (Bible, John 6:53). One may note, I can write wagons of crimes committed by Jesus. Now, one cannot find any man of character and moral.

Moral values redefined

111.    That Government has to make laws because it cannot create people who have necessary traits which are not harmful. But in case of Creator of universe named Jehovah and Allah, who could have created people with pre-programmed brains of good behaviour and stopped creation of minds dissenting with gods' own commands. Creating people of discerning minds and there after killing their own creatures {(Koran 8:17) and (Bible, Luke 19:27)} questions capability of their being almighty. Belief in such creationism is childish and shows lower stage of evolution of brain. It proves that Prophets were high class scoundrels of their times and their deeds and dogmas are quite questionable. That is the tragedy of faith.

Why should Allah and Jehovah survive?

112.    That Allah executed marriage of Prophet Muhammad’s daughter in law Zainab with Muhammad. (Koran 33:37-38). Nay! Allah permits loot and rape of any woman (Koran 23:6). Jesus supports marriage with one’s own daughter. (Bible, 1 Corinthians 7:36).

113.    That while the Christianity and Islam have stipulated the condition for existence of humanity of being slave of either Jesus or Allah, Aryans' Vedic culture grants liberty of faith. Its scriptures do not allow war in night, rape of women, dashing infants to pieces, ambush and terrorism. Aryans did propagate their Buddhism around the world, but nowhere had they ruled upon aliens’ territories. They did not demolish worship places and idols of aliens. They did not kill male persons and infants and did not rape women of alien faith. Their scriptures did not permit such crimes. Look! What Jews, Christians and Muslims did around the world! Jesus is fraud and enemy of Christians as well as Allah is fraud and enemy of Muslims.

114.    That secular Jesus is a ghost adopted by Christian rulers to rule upon the world. In Bible, Secular Jesus himself commands his sheep, “But those enemies of mine who did not want me to be king ` bring them here and kill them in front of me.” Bible, Luke 19:27. Secular Jesus further says in Bible, "Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword." (Bible, Matt 10:34) and that he has come on the earth to bring fire. (Bible, Luke 12:49).

115.    That the Christianity through colonialists Sonia is colluding with Muslims, through the aid and abetment of the Indian Constitution, [Article 29(1) of the Indian Constitution], against India's spiritual tradition and moral foundation. It is paving the way for Muslims to retain their Islamic identity and they use Mosques as center for exhorting Islamic dogmas. The Azaan, which is cognizable and non-bail able crime u/s 153 and 295 of the Indian Penal Code, shouted from the mosques of Muslims, is insult of Ishwar and Vedic Sanaatan Dharm. Allah commands Muslims to slay non-Muslims and eradicate persons of non-Islamic faiths as well as Jesus commands Christians to slay non Christians and eradicate persons, who do not accept Jesus their king. {Azaan, (Koran, 2:191-194 and 8:39), (Bible, Exodus/ Chapter 20 / The Ten Commandments/ Verses 3 and 5 and Luke 19:27)}.

116.    That everything anti-Vedic Sanaatan Dharm is promoted and Hindus are reduced to spineless jelly fish afraid to speak up. Hindus are falling prey to the corruption of the seculars and have become watered down version of their Hindu self. Hindus are more concerned with survival amidst discrimination, oppression and chaos. Hindus have become a laughingstock, and frequent target of Islamic fanatics and Missionaries. They are successful in imposing their outdated, closed and reductionist theology on helpless Hindus. In response to these multilevel attacks, Hindus have been paralyzed, hypnotized, and ostracized by corrupt politicians, colonial masters and Islamic fanatics.

117.    That there is no strong Hindu organization other than few Bhakti movements. They are preaching Bhakti and Hindus are observing Ahimsa as well as surrender and political non-involvement. They are not teaching for reminding Hindus to become politically active. As a result many Hindus think coercive religious conversion and colonialism is predetermined and therefore beyond their control. It is a great disaster for Hindus. Muslims, who are worldly gained political strength, established strong separate identity and are faithful to Allah and Islamic value system. Muslims demand their own way, throwing muscle power and tantrums like violent criminals. However, Muslims fail to realize that they are being exploited by Christians for annihilation of Vedic Sanaatan Dharm. No sooner Vedic Sanaatan Dharm would be annihilated, their Allah, Islam, Dar Ul Islam and Sariyat would finish in the fashion of Afghanistan and Iraq through Armageddon.

118.    That Aryavrt Government is here to fill the vacuum. Join us, if one wishes to survive.

Fight against source and not against symptoms.

119.    That through their Azaan, Imaams abuse deities and faiths of non-Muslims. Abusing notorious criminal Allah and the so-called predator and pirate prophet Muhammad is blasphemy that attracts death penalty. However, Muslim Imaams are being protected by Governments under section 196 of the Criminal Procedure Code. As such we have legal right to proscribe Koran, demolish mosques and Governments are duty bound to arrest and hang every Imam on the earth.

120.    That Governors and Judges, who administer oath to each other, have taken oath to preserve, protect and defend and uphold the conservation of the language, script, or culture of the minorities. We, Vedic Panthies, are minority among the minorities the world. Yet no Government is protecting our Vedic Sanaatan Dharm.

Liberty

121.    That so long as Indian Constitution, manifesto of Carl Marx, Koran, Bible, Democracy, Socialism, Islam and Christianity survive in the globe, neither life nor property of a Muslim is safe nor of a Christian is safe. There can be no liberty. The honour and dignity of a woman is not safe. Socialism of Carl Marx has already gone to hell. Now is the turn of Christianity and Islam. Nay! No one is innocent in the eyes of Islam [(Azaan and (Koran, 2:191-194 and 8:39) and Christianity (Bible, Luke 19:27)]. If these religions survive, the survival of human race is impossible. These criminal religions have been detained in Bharat to eradicate Bharat and Vedic culture, but in the view of the black 11 September 2001, these sectarians would kill each other like Yadavas of Dwaper era. The reason is quite simple. Both Christians and Muslims have to establish their culture and kingdom. War alone can decide the supremacy between them! Therefore, for the existence of human race the eradication of these criminal religions is must. Join Aryavrt to eradicate these cultures from the globe.

122.    That Koran says, “...The only religion in the sight of God is Islam...” (Koran 3:19). “If anyone desires a religion other than Islam, never will it be accepted of him; and in the Hereafter, he will be in the ranks of those who have lost (their selves in the Hellfire).” (Koran 3:85)

123.    That it is not up to me, but to Muslims and Christians themselves to tear out the hateful verses from their Koran and Bible.

124.    That Muslims and Christians want that you respect Christianity and Islam; but Christianity and Islam do not respect you.

125.    That Government and the so called independent judiciary insist that you respect Christianity/ Islam, but Christianity/ Islam has to slay you.

126.    That Christianity and Islam wants to rule the world, dominate and seek annihilation of Vedic Sanaatan Dharm.

127.    That in 1945 Nazism was defeated. In 1989 Communism was defeated. Now is the turn of Christianity and Islam.

Defend our Vedic Sanaatan Dharm.

128.    That thus, Christianity and Islam corrupt their followers. Sir Edmund Burke put it this way: "All that is necessary for the forces of evil to win in this world is for a few good men to do nothing."

129.    That Vedic Panth has no compulsion in faiths, no hell fire and no death penalty. Gita 7:21. If one wishes to survive as well as protect human race, one may switch to Vedic Panth. Choice is yours. Who has seen heaven? Why should you corrupt yourself? Why should you commit crime with human races? Live and let live.

130.    That peace is taboo in Islam. Allah commands, (Koran 2:216) “Fight until persecution, which is worse than slaughter, (Koran, 2:191) is no more and religion is all for Allah.” (Koran 8:39). Thus, Islam, camouflaged as secular, is a religion of the sword with the blade forever at the throat of every unbeliever. Those Muslims, who did not adopt crusade (Jihad) and observed peace have been consigned by Allah to their grave hell, since the inception of Islam. They would bear the punishment till Qayamat i.e the Day of Judgment. However, those who plundered, murdered, raped women of non-Muslims, became Ghazi if survived and secured instant supreme heaven (Firdaus) if slain. Allah is fraud. Allah promises heaven but consigns Muslims in hell till The Day of Judgment.

131.    That the biggest lesson to be learned by humanity is that one cannot negotiate with Christianity and Islam. Humanity's only recourse is: Doctrine of Reciprocity. In contrast judiciary, in her observation wrote, “It is the greatness of our founding fathers that under the leadership of Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru (?) they kept a cool head and decided to declare India a secular country instead of a Hindu country. This was a very difficult decision at that time because Pakistan had declared itself an Islamic State and hence there must have been tremendous pressure on Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru (?) and our other leaders to declare India a Hindu State. It is their greatness that they resisted this pressure and kept a cool head and rightly declared India to be a secular state.”  

132.    That may I know as to where is the greatness in providing unfettered fundamental right to Christians and Muslims to conserve their culture of murder, plunder and rape of women vides Article 29(1) of the Indian Constitution. May I know as to how Azaan, which means ‘Allah alone can be worshipped’, is secular? Where is the greatness in snatching the property and means of production from citizens as per Article 39(c) of the Indian Constitution and imposing FDI? http://www.aryavrt.com/fdi-in-hindi

133.    I have mailed complaint against ‘Azaan’ and ‘Masjids’ to the President of India. A copy of the same is being attached with this WRITTEN ARGUMENT and is marked as Annexure-s11.

134.    That no case has been proved against me. I have right of clear acquittal. Simultaneously, I demand arrest of Imams for shouting Azaan, proscription of Koran, which is Jihad manual and destruction of all mosques, wherefrom genocide of non-Muslims is preached.

 

(Ayodhya Prasad Tripathi)

Accused in Person.

Dated; Delhi, Oct 11, 2012.


Annexure-s1

In the matter of FIR 440/96

State V/s Ayodhya Prasad Tripathi

Police Station Roop Nagar Delhi North

Supreme Court of India

Rizan And Anr. vs State Of Chhatisgarh, Through The ... on 21 January, 2003

Equivalent citations: AIR 2003 SC 976, 2003 (1) ALD Cri 367, 2003 CriLJ 1226

Author: A Pasayat

Bench: S V.Patil J, A Pasayat J

JUDGMENT

Arijit Pasayat, J.

1. Leave granted.

2. Appellants call in question legality of impugned judgment rendered by the Madhya Pradesh High Court at Jabalpur. whereby it upheld the conviction and sentence awarded by the Additional Sessions Judge. Jashpurnagar.

3. Prosecution version which led to the trial of the appellants thereinafter referred to as 'the accused' by their respective names) is as follows:

4. On (SIC) information was lodged by Jhanguram (PW-2) that six persons had assaulted him with intention to take his life, and had also caused injuries to his wife Pandir Bai (P.W.4) and his daughter in-law Tilobai (P.W.5). On the basis of such information, the case was registered and investigation was undertaken. On completion of investigation charge was framed for commission of offences punishable under Section 147, 148 307 read with Section 34 and Section 323 of the Indian Penal Code. 1860 (in short 'IPC'). It was alleged that accused Khodhibai (since acquitted) and Pandri Bai (P.W.4) are sisters. There was a bad blood between them over certain properties and civil litigation was going on. The sic accused persons were cutting the crops raised by Jhanguram (P.W.2) on the date of the occurrence. when he asked them not to do so, the accused persons did not pay any heed. Suddenly accused appellant. Rizan snatched the axe which Jhanguram (P.W.2) was holding and assault ed him with the said weapon and caused several injuries on different parts of his body e.g. lips hands and feet. More particularly, accused-appellant. (SIC) hit Jhanguram and Pandri Bai with a stick. Other accused persons also hit him with their hands and feet. Some persons standing nearby came to their rescue. The injured P.Ws. 2, 4 and 5 were examined by the Doctor (PW-1). During investigation the weapon of assault i.e. axe was seized from the accused-appellant. Rizan and some other weapons from the other persons. Six witnesses were examined to further the prosecution version. Accused persons pleaded innocence and false implication. On consideration of the evidence on record, the Trial Court held that the prosecution has not been able to bring home the accusations against accused-Paras. Vinod, Khodibai and (SIC)

5. Accused-appellant Rizan was found guilty for the offences punishable under Section 326 IPC for inflicting injuries on Jhanguram (P.W.2) and under Section 323 IPC for the injuries inflicted on Pandri Bai (P.W.4). Accused Duda was found guilty for the offences punishable under Section 323 IPC for inflicting injuries on aforesaid two witnesses. However, both the accused-appellants Rizan and Duda were acquitted of the offences relatable, to Sections 147 and 148 IPC. It was also held that the offence committed by the accused persons is not covered by Section 307 IPC. After hearing the accused persons on the question of sentence, accused-appellant. Rizan was sentenced to undergo RI for two (SIC) for the offence punishable under Sections 326 and 323 IPC. Both the sentences were directed to run concurrently. Accused Duda was sentenced to undergo RI for two months. In appeal, by the impugned judgment, the High Court dismissed the appeal maintaining the convictions and the sentences.

6. In support of the appeal, learned counsel for the accused-appellants submitted that this is a case where the conviction is not maintainable as the injuries were inflicted by the accused-appellants while exercising their right of private defence. Further on the same set of evidence four persons have been acquitted and, therefore, so far as the appellants are concerned, conviction does not stand to reason. It is also submitted that the witnesses who claim to have seen the occurrence are witnesses who were in inimical terms with the accused-appellants. Residually, it is submitted that the sentences as imposed are high, and considering the fact that the occurrence took place five years back, the sentences should be reduced to what has already been undergone which is stated to be about three months. It is pointed out that accused-appellant. Duda has already suffered the sentence awarded. Learned Counsel for the prosecution on the other hand submitted that the evidence clearly rules out application of the right of private defence. Merely because the evidence of some of the witnesses has not been accepted to be fully reliable, in view of the clear and categorical findings recorded that the evidence (SIC) so far as the appellants are concerned, the conviction does not suffer from any infirmity.

7. We shall first deal with the contention regarding interestedness of the witnesses for furthering prosecution version. Relationship is not a factor to affect credibility of a witness. It is more often than not that a relation would not conceal actual culprit and make allegations against an innocent person. Foundation has to be laid if plea of false implication is made. In such cases, the court has to adopt a careful approach and analyses evidence to find out whether it is cogent ad credible.

8. In Dalip Singh and Ors. v. The State of Punjab it has been laid down as under:-

"A witness is normally to be considered independent unless he or she springs from sources which are likely to be tainted and that usually means unless the witness has cause, such as enmity against the accused, to which to implicate him falsely. Ordinarily a close relation would be the last to screen the real culprit and falsely implicate an innocent person. It is true, when feelings run high and there is personal cause for enmity that there is a tendency to drag in an innocent person against whom a witness has a grudge along with the guilty, but foundation must be laid for such a criticism and the mere fact of relationship far from being a foundation is often a sure guarantee of truth. However, we are not attempting any sweeping generalization. Each case must be judged on its own facts. Our observations are only made to combat what is so often but forward in cases before us as a general rule of prudence. There is no such general rule. Each case must be limited to and be governed by its own facts."

9. The above decision has since been followed in Guli Chand and Ors. v. State of Rajasthan in which Vadivelu thevan v. State of Madras also relied upon.

10. We may also observe that the ground that the witness being a close relative and consequently being a partisan witness, should not be relied upon has no substance. This theory was repelled by this Court as early as in Dalip Singh's case (supra) in which surprise was expressed over the impression which prevailed in the minds of the Members of the Bar that relatives were not independent witnesses. Speaking through Vivian Bose, J. it was observed:

"We are unable to agree with the learned Judges of the High Court that the testimony of the two eyewitnesses requires corroboration. If the foundation for such an observation is based on the fact that the witnesses are women and that the fate of seven men hangs on their testimony. We know of no such rule. If it is grounded on the reason that they are closely related to the deceased we are unable to concur. This is a fallacy common to many criminal cases and one which another Bench of this Court endeavoured to dispel in - Rameshwar v. State of Rajasthan' . We find, however, that it unfortunately still persists if not in the judgments of the Courts at any rate in the arguments of counsel."

11. Again in Masalti and Ors. v. State of U.P. this Court observed: (p. 209-210 para 14):

"But it would, we think, be unreasonable to contend that evidence given by witnesses should be discarded only on the ground that it is evidence of partisan or interested witnesses.....The mechanical rejection of such evidence on the sale ground that it is partisan would invariably lead to failure of justice. No hard and fast rule can be laid down as to how much evidence should be appreciated. Judicial approach has to be cautious in dealing with such evidence; but the plea that such evidence should be rejected because it is partisan cannot be accepted as correct."

12. To the same effect is the decision in State of Punjab v. Jagir Singh and Lehna v. State of Haryana (2002. (3) SCC 76).

13. Stress was laid by the accused-appellants on the non- acceptance of evidence tendered by some witnesses to contend about desirability to throw out entire prosecution case. In essence prayer is to apply the principle of "falsus in uno falsus in omnibus" (false in one thing, false in everything). This plea is clearly untenable. Even if major portion of evidence is found to be deficient, in case residue is sufficient to prove guilt of an accused, notwithstanding acquittal of number of other co-accused persons, his conviction can be maintained. It is the duty of Court to separate grain from chaff. Where chaff can be separated from grain, it would be open to the Court to convict an accused notwithstanding the fact that evidence has been found to be deficient to prove guilt of other accused persons. Falsity of particular material witness or material particular would not ruin it from the beginning to end. The maxim "falsus in uno falsus in omnibus" has no application in India and the witnesses cannot be branded as liar. The maxim "falsus in uno falsus in omnibus" has not received general acceptance nor has this maxim come to occupy the status of rule of law. It is merely a rule of caution. All that it amounting to is that in such cases testimony may be disregarded and not that it must be disregarded. The doctrine merely involves the question of weight of evidence which a court may apply in a given set of circumstances, but it is not what may be called ' mandatory rule of evidence' (See Nisar Alli v. The State of Uttar Pradesh . Merely because some of the accused persons have been acquitted, though evidence against all of them. so far as direct testimony went, was the same does not lead as a necessary corollary that those who have been convicted must also be acquitted. It is always open to a Court to difference accused who had been acquitted from those who were convicted. (See Gurucharan Singh and Anr. v. State of Punjab (AIR (SIC) SC 460). The doctrine is a dangerous one specially in India for if a whole body of the testimony were to be rejected because witness was evidently speaking an untruth in (SIC) to be feared that administration of criminal justice would come to a dead- stop. Witnesses just cannot help in giving embroidery to a story, however, a true in the main. Therefore, it has to be appraised in each case as to what extent the evidence is worthy of acceptance and merely because in some respects the Court considers the same to be insufficient for placing reliance on the testimony of a witness, it does not necessarily follow as a matter of law that it must be disregarded in all respects as well. The evidence has to be shifted with care. The aforesaid dictum is not a sound rule for the reason that one hardly comes across a witness whose evidence does not contain a grain of untruth or at any rate exaggeration, embroideries or embellishment. (See Sohrab s/o Beli Navata and Anr. v. The State of Madhya Pradesh and Ugar Ahir and Ors. v. The State of Bihar . An attempt has to be made to, as noted above in terms of felicitous metaphor, separate grain from the chaff, truth from falsehood. Where it is not feasible to separate truth from falsehood, because grain and chaff are inextricably mixed up, and in the process of separation an absolutely new case has to be reconstructed by divorcing essential details presented by the prosecution completely from the context and the background against which they are made, the only available course to be made is to discard the evidence in toto (See (SIC) Ariel v. State of Madhya Pradesh (AIR (SIC) SC 15) and Palaka Singh and Ors. v. The State of Punjab. . As observed by this Court in State of Rajasthan v. Smt. Kalki and Anr. . normal discrepancies in evidence are those which are due to normal errors of observation. normal errors of memory due to lapse of time, due to mental disposition such as shock and horror at the time of occurrence and those are always there however honest and truthful a witness may be. Material discrepancies are those which are not normal, and not expected of a normal person. Courts have to label the category to which a discrepancy may be categorized. While normal discrepancies do not corrode the credibility of a party's case, material discrepancies do so. These aspects were highlighted recently in Krishna Mochi and Ors. v. State of Bihar etc. and Gangadhar Behera and Ors. v. State of Orissa (2002 (7) Supreme 276). Accusations have been clearly established against accused-appellants in the case at hand. The Courts below have categorically indicated the distinguishing features in evidence so far as acquitted and convicted accused are concerned.

14. Then comes plea relating to alleged exercise of right of private defence. Section 96. IPC provides that nothing is an offence which is done in the exercise of the right of private defence. The Section does not define the expression 'right of private defence'. It merely indicates that nothing is an offence which is done in the exercise of such right. Whether in a particular set of circumstances, a person acted in the exercise of the right of private defence is a question of fact to be determined on the facts and circumstances of each case. No test in the abstract for determining such a question can be laid down. In determining this question of fact, the Court must consider all the surrounding circumstances. It is not necessary for the accused to plead in so many words that he acted in self-defence. If the circumstances show that the right of private defence was legitimately exercised, it is open to the Court to consider such a plea. In a given case the Court can consider it even if the accused has not taken it. If the same is available to be considered from the material on record. Under Section 105 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, the burden of proof, is on the accused, who sets of the plea of self-defence and in the absence of proof. it is not possible for the Court to presume the truth of the plea of self-defence. The Court shall presume the absence of such circumstances. It is for the accused to place necessary material on record either by himself adducing positive evidence or by eliciting necessary facts from the witnesses examined for the prosecution. An accused taking the plea of the right of private defence is not required to call evidence; he can establish his plea by reference to circumstances transpiring from the prosecution evidence itself. The question in such a case would be a question of assessing the true effect of the prosecution evidence, and not a question of the accused discharging any burden. where the right of private defence is pleaded, the defence must be a reasonable and probable version satisfying the Court that the harm caused by the accused was necessary for either warding off the attack of for forestalling the further reasonable apprehension from the side of the accused. The burden of establishing the plea of self- defence is on the accused and the burden stands discharged by showing preponderance of probalities is favour of that plea on the basis of the material on record. (See Munshi Ram and Ors. v. Delhi Administration. AIR 1968 SC 702. State of Gujarat v. Bai Fatima: : State of U.P. v. Mohd. Musheer Khan : and Mohinder Pal Jolly v. State of Punjab: ). Sections 100 to 101 define the extent of the right of private defence of body. If a person has a right to private defence of body under Section 97, that right extends under Section 100 to causing death if there is reasonable apprehension that death or grievous hurt would be the consequence of the assault. The oft quoted observation of this Court in Salim Zia v. State of U.P. . runs as follows:

"It is true that the burden on an accused person to establish the plea of self-defence is not as onerous as the one which lies on the prosecution and that while the prosecution is required to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt the accused need not establish the plea to the hilt and may discharge his onus by establishing a mere preponderance of probabilities either by laying basis for that plea in the cross-examination of the prosecution witnesses or by adducing defence evidence."

The accused need not prove the existence of the right of private defence beyond reasonable doubt. It is enough for him to show as in a civil case that the preponderance of probabilities is in favour of his plea.

15. The number of injuries is not always a safe criterion for determining who the aggressor was. It cannot be stated as a universal rule that whenever the injuries are on the body of the accused persons, a presumption must necessarily be raised that the accused persons had caused injuries in exercise on the right of private defence. The defence has to further establish that the injuries so caused on the accused probabilities the version of the right of private defence. Non-explanation of the injuries sustained by the accused at about the time of occurrence or in the course of altercation is a very important circumstance. But mere non-explanation of the injuries by the prosecution may not affect the prosecution case in all cases. This principle applies to cases where the injuries sustained by the accused are minor and superficial or where the evidence is so clear and cogent. so independent and disinterested, so probable, consistent and credit-worthy that it far outweighs the effect of the omission on the part of the prosecution to explain the injuries. [See Lakshmi Singh v. State of Bihar ]. In this case, as the Courts below found there was not even a single injury on the accused persons, while PW2 sustained large number of injuries and was hospitalized for more than a month. A plea of right of private defence cannot be based on (SIC) and speculation. While considering whether the right of private defence is available to an accused, it is not relevant whether he may have a chance to inflict severe and mortal injury on the aggression. In order to find whether the right of private defence is available to an accused, the entire incident must be examined with care and viewed in its proper setting. Section 97 deals with the subject matter of right of private defence. The plea of right comprises the body or property (i) of the person exercising the right: or (ii) of any other person: and the right may be exercised in the case of any offence against the body, and in the case of offences of theft, robbery mischief or criminal trespass, and attempts at such offences in relation to property. Section 99 lays down the limits of the right of private defence. Section 96 and 98 give a right of private defence against certain offences and acts. The right given under Sections 96 to 98 and 100 to 106 is controlled by Section 99. To claim a right of private defence extending to voluntary causing of death, the accused must shows that there were circumstances giving rise to reasonable grounds for apprehending that either death of grievous hurt would be caused to him. The burden is on the accused to show that he had a right of private defence which extended to causing of death. Sections 100 and 101. IPC define the limit and extent of right of private defence.

16. Sections 102 and 105. IPC deal with commencement and continuance of the right of private defence of body and property respectively. The right commences, as soon as a reasonable apprehension of danger to the body arises from an attempt, or threat, or commit the offence, although the offence may not have been committed but not until that there is that reasonable apprehension. The right lasts so long as the reasonable apprehension of the danger to the body continues. In Jai (SIC) v. State of Punjab , it was observed that as soon as the cause for reasonable apprehension disappears and the threat has either been destroyed or has been but to route. there can be no occasion to exercise the right of private defence.

17. In order to find whether right of private defence is available or not, the injuries received by the accused the (SIC) of threat to his safety, the injuries caused by the accused and the circumstances whether the accused had time to (SIC) (SIC) to public authorities are all relevant factors to be considered. Thus, running to house, fetching a (SIC) and assaulting the deceased are by no means a matter of (SIC). These acts bear stamp of a design to kill and take the case out of the purview of private defence. Similar view was expressed by this Court in Biran Singh v. State of Bihar and recently in Sekar @Raja (SIC) v. State represented by Inspector of Police Tamil Nadu (SIC) Supreme 124).

18. Sentences imposed do not in any way appear to be (SIC). Merely because the occurrence took place sometime back, same cannot be a factor to reduce the sentences. The appeal is without (SIC) and is dismissed.

S V.Patil J, A Pasayat J

21 January, 2003

 


Annexure-s2

In the matter of FIR 440/96

State V/s Ayodhya Prasad Tripathi

Police Station Roop Nagar Delhi North

 

Supreme Court Judgements

Supreme Court Asks Government To Pay Imam Salaries
By Sanjeev Nayyar , October 2005 [ esamskriti@suryaconsulting.net]

Chapter :

A friend of mine told me of a 1993 Supreme Court judgment that asked the Central & State governments to come out with a scheme for payment of salaries to Imams. Having got for a copy of the judgment decided to reproduce it verbatim.   

Summary - Imams spend substantial time in mosques. Their most important duty is that of leading community prayer in a mosque the very purpose for which a mosque is created. Imams, ‘incharge of religious activities of the mosque’ had approached the Supreme Court under Article 32 of the Constitution for enforcement of fundamental right against their exploitation by Wakf Boards. They seek a direction to Central and State Wakf Boards to treat the petitioner as employees of the Board and to pay them base wages to enable them to survive. The Wakf Board says Imams are not their employees – do not have the resources to pay them. The right to life enshrined in Art. 21 means right to live with human dignity. In the above circumstances the Supreme Court issued the directions to the Union of India and the Central Wakf Board to prepare a Scheme within a period of six months in respect of different types of mosques.  

Azaan Age article dated October 5, 2005. “Imams across the country are in for a surprise bonanza of up to Rs 3 lakhs each in the form of arrears. The imams leading the prayers in these mosques are eligible for arrears, with the Delhi high court recently recognizing that arrears have accrued to the imams since the 1993 of the Supreme Court. The Delhi High Court has directed the Delhi Waqb Board to give a schedule of payment of arrears by October 24. The 1993 SC judgment ruled that the imams would be paid salaries and directed the Centre and Central Waqf Council to prepare a scheme for payment of salaries within 6 months. The salaries scheme was submitted on 5.1.1996, during the tenure of the P.V. Narasimha Rao government. The Supreme Court on February 3, 2003 directed that waqf tribunals should be set up in the states so that imams in each state could move the respective tribunals for settling disputes over salaries. However, salaries were not paid. It was against this background that the Delhi High Court recognized that arrears have accrued since 1993”. 

Friends some thoughts. If India is a secular state and being secular means separation of state from religion why must the Courts get involved in what is purely a religious matter, a dispute between the Imams and Waqf Board. Some of you might argue that temple priests in Tamil Nadu and perhaps states like Karnataka & Andhra Pradesh get salaries from the state government so what is wrong in the State paying salaries to Imams. There is a key difference. Temple collections go to state government coffers unlike mosque collections, which go to the Wakf Board or are part of the mosque funds. In a recent article titled “Nationalization of Hindu Temples” Sandhya Jain wrote. “ In 2002, Karnataka received Rs. 72 crores as revenue, returned Rs. 10 crores for temple maintenance, and granted Rs. 50 crores for madrasas and Rs. 10 crores for churches’. (Daily Pioneer, October 7,2003.)

AIR 1993 SUPREME COURT 2086

K. RAMASWAMY AND R. M. SAHAI, JJ.

Writ Petn. (C) No. 715 of 1990, D/-13-5-1993.All India Imam Organization and others, Petitioners v. Union of India and others, Respondents.

Constitution of India, Arts. 32, 21 – Right to live – Imams, “in charge of religious activities of mosque” – Are entitled to emoluments even in absence of statutory provision in Wakf Act – Supreme Court directed the Govt. and Central Wakf Board to prepare Scheme within period of six months.

“Imam” – Is entitled to emoluments even in absence of provisions under Wakf Act.

Wakf Act (1954), Pre.

Muslim Law – Imam – Entitled to emoluments even in absence of statutory provision.The objective and purpose of every mosque being community worship and it being the obligation of Board under the Act to ensure that the objective of the wakf is carried on, the Board cannot escape from its responsibility for proper maintenance of religious service in a mosque. To say, therefore, that the Board has no control over the mosque or Imam is not correct. Absence of any provision in the Act or the rules providing for appointment of Imam or Laying down condition of their service is probably because they are not considered as employees. At the same time, it cannot be disputed that due to change in social and economic set-up they too need sustenance. Nature of their job is such that they may be required to be present in the mosque nearly for the whole day. There may be some who may perform the duty as part of their religious observance. Still others may be ordained by the community to do so. But there are large numbers of such persons who have no other occupation or profession or service for their livelihood except doing duty as Imam. 

What should be their fate? Should they be paid any remuneration and if so now much and by whom? According to the Board they are appointed by the mutawallis and, therefore, any payment by the Board was out of question. Prime facie it is not correct as the letter of appointments issued in some States are from the Board. But assuming that they are appointed by the Mutawallis the Board cannot escape from its responsibility as the mutawallis too u/s 30 of the Act are under the supervision and control of the Board. The right to life enshrined in Art. 21 means right to live with human dignity. It is too late in the day, therefore, to claim or urge that since Imams perform religious duties they are not entitled to any emoluments. 

Whatever may have been the ancient concept but it has undergone change and even in the Muslim countries mosques are subsidized and the Imams are paid their, remuneration. Therefore, it cannot be said that in our set up or in absence of any statutory provision in the Wakf Act the Imams who look after the religious activities of mosques are not entitled to any remuneration. Financial difficulties of the institution cannot be above fundamental right of a citizen. If the Boards have been entrusted with the responsibility of supervising and administering the Wakf then it is their duty to harness resources to pay those persons who perform the most important duty namely of leading community prayer in a mosque the very purpose for which it is created.

In the circumstances the Supreme Court issued the directions to the Union of India and the Central WakfBoard to prepare a Scheme within a period of six months in respect of different types of mosques.  (para 5). 

R. M. SAHAI, J.:- Imams, ‘incharge of religious activities of the mosque’ (1) have approached this Court by way of this, representatives, petition under Article 32 of the Constitution for enforcement of fundamental right against their exploitation by Wakf Boards. Relief sought is direction to Central and State Wakf Boards to treat the petitioner as employees of the Board and to pay them base wages to enable them to survive. Basis of claim is glaring disparity between the nature of work and amount of remuneration. Higher pay scale is claimed for degree holders.

2. ‘Imams perform the duty of offering prayer (Namaz) for congregation in mosques. Essentially the mosque is a center of community worship where Muslims perform ritual prayers and where historically they have also gathered for political, social and cultural functions’. (2) ‘The functions of the mosque is summarized by the 13th Century Jurist Ibn Taymiyah as a place of gathering where prayer was celebrated and where public affairs were conducted’. (3) ‘All mosque are where Muslim men on an equalitarian basis rich or poor, noble or humble, stand in rows to perform their prayers behind the Imam’. (4) Imams are expected to look after the cleanliness of mosque, call Azans from the balcony of the minarets to the whole religious meetings and propagate the Islamic faith. They are expected to be well versed in the Shariat, the holy Quran, the Hadiths, ethics, and philosophy, social, economic and religious aspects. ‘Imam or prayer leader is the most important appointee. In the early days the ruler himself filled this role; he was leader (Imam) of the government of war, and of the common Salat (“ritual prayer”). Under the Abbasids, when the caliph no longer conducted prayers on a regular basis, a paid Imam was appointed. While any prominent or learned Muslim can have the honor of leading prayers, each mosque specifically appoints a man well versed in theological matters to acts as its Imam. He is in charge of the religious activities of the mosque and it is his duty to conduct prayers five times a day in front of Mihrab’. (5)

3. On nature of the duties performed by the Imams there is no dispute. But both the Union of India and various State Wakf Boards of different States which have put in appearance in response to the notice issued by this Court have seriously disputed the manner of their appointment, right to receive any payment and absence of any relationship of master and servant. It is stated that the Imams or Muazzins are appointed by the Mutwallis. According to them the Wakf Boards have nothing to do either with their appointment or working. It is claimed that under Islamic religious practice they are not entitled to any emoluments as a matter or right as the Islamic law ordains the Imams to offer voluntary service. They are said to be paid some money out of the donations received in mosques or by the Mutwallis of the Boards. Their job is stated to be honorary and not paid. Nature of duty under Islamic Shariat is stated to lead prayers which is performed voluntarily by any suitable Muslim without any monetary benefit. Some of the affidavits claim that they are appointed by people of the locality. 

The Union Government has specially stated that the Islam does not recognize the concept of priesthood as in order religions and the selection of Imams is the sole prerogative of the members of the local community or the managing committee, if any of the mosque. According to Karnataka Wakf Board Imamat in the mosque is not considered to be employment. The allegation of the petitioners that due to meager payment they are humiliated or insulted in the society is denied and it is claimed that they are respectable persons who carry on the duty of Imamat as a part of religious activity and not for earning bread and butter. The Delhi Wakf Board pointed out that the honorarium is paid to an Imam as a consideration for his five-time presence in the mosque regularly and punctually. The Board has denied any right to exercise an authority over the mosque where Imams and Muazzins are appointed by the mutawallis or by the managing committees. It is stated that holding of a certificate from a registered institution to enable a person to lead the prayer is not necessary as the only requirement for being an Imam under the Shariat is to have a thorough knowledge of the holy Quran and the rites, rules and obligations required for offering prayers according to the principles laid down by the Kuran and Sunnah. 

The affidavit filed on behalf of Wakf Board has pointed out that mosque can be categorized in five categories, one which are under direct control or management of the Government such as Mecca Masjid or the mosque situated in public garden which are not governed or regulated by the Muslim Wakf Board second mosques which are under the direct management of Wakf Board; third mosques which are under the control of mutwallis under various Wakfs according to the wishes of the Wakif as the creator of the Wakf; fourth, mosques which are not registered with the Wakf Board and are managed by local inhabitants and are under the management: of the public who offer prayers regularly in a particular mosque; and fifth, mosques which are not managed by mutwallis or the Muslims of the locality. 

It is claimed that Imams of fourth and fifth category are not regular and any Muslim can lead the prayers, whereas under the third category mosques are having regular Imams. Financial difficulty of the Wakf Board to meet the demand has also been pointed out. The Pondicherry Wakf  Board has pointed that there is not even one employee except a peon working therein and, therefore, it is not possible to meet the demand of the Imam. It is also claimed that the board has no control over the pesh-Imams as they are considered to be well-dignified personality of the society and they are given due respect by the Muslim community as a whole. 

In the counter-affidavit filed by the Punjab Wakf Board it has been stated that Imams of mosques in Punjab were being paid on basis of their qualification. Imams Nazara (Mubtali grade) are in the scale of Rs. 380-20-580-25-830-30-980, whereas Imams Hafiz (Wasti grade) are paid Rs. 445-20-645-25895-30-1045, and Imam Alim (Muntali grade) are paid Rs. 520-20-720-25-970-30-1120. They are also paid Rs. 30/- per month medical allowance and Muazzins are paid Rs 310/- per month. These scales were revised in 1992. According to them Imams of all the mosques in Punjab. Haryana and Himachal Pradesh which come under the Punjab Wakf Board are being paid regularly and they are treated as regular employees. The Sunni Central Wakf Board of Uttar Pradesh filed only a written submission stating that all the sunni mosques were managed by mutawallis of the concerned managing committees and not by the Wakf Board.

4. The mosque differs from a church or a temple in many respects. Ceremonies and service connected with marriages and birth are never performed in mosques. The rites that are important and integral functions of many churches such as confessions, penitences and confirmations do not exist in the mosques. (6) Nor any offerings are made as is common in Hindu temples. ‘In Muslim countries mosques are subsidized by the States, hence no collection of money from the community is permitted. The Ministry of Wakf (Endowments) appoints the servant, preachers and readers of the Koran. Mosques in non-Muslim countries are subsidized by individuals. They are administered by their founder or by their special fund. A caretaker is appointed to keep the place clean. The Muazzin calls to prayer five times a day from the minaret. (7) In our country in 1954 Wakf Act was passed by the Parliament for better administration and supervision of Wakfs. To achieve the objective of the Act Section 9 provides for establishment of a Wakf Board the functions of which are detailed in Section 15. Sub-section (1) of it reads as under:

“(1) Subject to any rules that may be made under this Act, the (general superintendence of all wakfs in a State in relation to all matters except those which are expressly required by this Act to be dealt with by the Wakf Commissioner, shall vest) in the Board established for the State; and it shall be the duty of the Board so to exercise its powers under this Act as to ensure that the Wakfs under its superintendence are properly maintained, controlled and administered and the income thereof is duly applied to the objects and for the purposes for which such wakfs were created or intended:

Provided that in exercising its powers under this Act in respect of any wakf, the Board shall act in conformity with the directions of the wakf, the purposes of the wakf and any usage or custom of the wakf sanctioned by the Muslim law.”

Clause (b) of sub-section (2) obliges the Board “to ensure that the income and other property of a wakf are applied to the objects and for the purposes for which that wakf was created or intended.”

5. The Board is vested not only with supervisory and administrative power over the wakfs but even the financial power vests in it. One of its primary duties is to ensure that the income from the wakf is spent on carrying out the purpose for which wakf was created.

Mosques are wakfs and are required to be registered under the Act over which the Board exercises control Purpose of their creation is community worship. Namaz or Salat is the mandatory practice observed in every mosque. ‘(Among the Five Pillars (arkan; sg; rukn) of Islam it holds the second most important position immediately after the declaration of faith (shahadah)(8). The Principal functionary to undertake it is the Imam. The objective and purpose of every mosque being community worship and it being the obligation of Board under the Act to ensure that the objective of the wakf is carried on the Board cannot escape from its responsibility for proper maintenance of religious service in a mosque. To say therefore, that the Board has no control over the mosque or Imam is not correct. Absence of any provision in the Act or the rules providing for appointment of Imam or laying down condition of their service is probably because they are not considered as employees. At the same time it cannot be disputed that due to change in social and economic set-up they too need sustenance. Nature of their job is such that they may be required to be present in the mosque nearly for the whole day. There may be some who may perform the duty as part of their religious observance. Still others may be ordained by the community to do so. But there are large numbers of such persons who have no other occupation or profession or service for their livelihood except doing duty as Imam. What should be their fate? Should they be paid any remuneration and if so how much and by whom? 

According to the Board they are appointed by the mutallis and there fore, any payment by the board was out of question. Prima facie it is not correct as the letter of appointments issued in some states are from the Board. But assuming that they are appointed by the mutawallis the Board cannot escape from its responsibility as the mutawallis too u/s 36 of the Act are under the supervision and control of the Board. In a series of decisions rendered by this Court it has been held that right to life enshrined in Article 21 means right to live with human dignity. It is too late in the day, therefore, to claim or urge that since Imams perform religious duties they are not entitled to any emoluments. Whatever may have been the ancient concept but it has undergone change and even in Muslim countries mosques are subsidized and the Imams are paid their remuneration. 

We are, therefore, not willing to accept the submission that in our set up or in absence of any statutory provision in the Wakf Act the imams who look after the religious activities of mosques are not entitled to any remuneration. Much was argued on behalf of Union and the Wakf Boards that their financial position was not such that they can meet the obligations of paying the Imams as they are being paid in the State of Punjab. It was also urged that the number of mosques is so large that it would entail heavy expenditure, which the boards of different States would not be able to bear. We do not find any correlation between the two. Financial difficulties of the institution cannot be above fundamental right of a citizen. If the boards have been entrusted with the responsibility of supervising and administering the Wakf then it is their duty to harness resources to pay those persons who perform the most important duty namely of leading community prayer in a mosque the very purpose for which it is created.

6. In the circumstances we allow this petition and issue following directions:

(i) The Union of India and the Central Wakf Board will prepare a scheme we within a period of six months in respect of different types of mosques, some detail of which has been furnished in the counter affidavit filed by the Delhi Wakf Board.

(ii) Mosques which are under control of the Government shall not be governed by this order. But if their Imams are not paid any remuneration and they have no independent income. The Government may fix their emoluments on the basis as the Central Wakf Board may do for other mosques in pursuance of our order.

(iii) For other mosques, except those which are not registered with the Board of their respective States or which are not manned by members of Islamic faith the scheme shall provide for payment of remuneration to such Imams taking guidance from the scale of pay prevalent in the State of Punjab and Haryana.

(iv) The State Boards shall ascertain income of each mosque the number and nature of Imams required by it namely full time or part time.

(v) For the full time Punjab Wakf Board may be treated as a guideline. That shall also furnish guideline for payment to part time Imam.

(vi) In all those mosques where full time Imams are working they shall be paid the remuneration determined in pursuance of this order.

(vii) Part time and honorary Imam shall be paid such remuneration and allowance as is determined under the scheme.

(viii) The scheme shall also take into account those mosques which are small or are in the rural area or are such as mentioned in the affidavit of Pondicherry Board and have no source of income and find out ways and means to raise its income.

(ix) The exercise should be completed and the scheme be enforced within six months.

(x) Our order for payment to Imams shall come into operation from 1st Dec., 1993. In case the scheme is not prepared within the time allowed then it shall operate retrospectively from 1st December, 1993.

(xi) The scheme framed by the Central Wakf Board shall be implemented by every State Board.

7. The Writ petition is decided accordingly. Parties shall bear their own costs.

Petition allowed 

Long Live Sanatana Dharam

 

Annexure-s3

In the matter of FIR 440/96

State V/s Ayodhya Prasad Tripathi

Police Station Roop Nagar Delhi North

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

President Secretariat, New Delhi - 110004

Web site: http://helpline.rb.nic.in/

This is a public document. Any one can view the status from the web site by typing the above Request/Grievance Registration Number. There is no pass-word.

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:-

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 money 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.

Apt.

 

ANNEXURE-1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD.

*-*-*-*-*-*

CIVIL MISC. WRIT PETITION NO. 9672 OF 1988

District:-Gorakhpur

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

versus

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

REPORT/ORDER OF THE JOINT REGISTRAR, DT. 28.7.1989

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.

Sd/-K.N.Ojha

Joint Registrar ©

28-07-1989

TRUE COPY

Sd. Illegible 3.9.90

S.O.COPYING’D’ SECTION

HIGH COURT ALLAHABAD.

 

IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

*******

ANNEXURE NO.2

IN

CIVIL MISC. WRIT PETITION NO. 9672 OF 1988

District:-Gorakhpur

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

versus

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

HIGH COURT, ALLAHABAD

ORDER-SHEET

9-8-1989

Hon: Ravi S. Dhavan

Present:

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.

TRUE COPY

 


Annexure-s4

In the matter of FIR 440/96

State V/s Ayodhya Prasad Tripathi

Police Station Roop Nagar Delhi North

 

A CASE FOR THE ARREST OF TOP TERRORISTS IN PARTITIONED INDIA

Date: 9/27/2003

Comment

REAL TERRORISTS WHO PARTITIONED INDIA AND ARE STILL SOWING SEEDS OF NEXT CIVIL WAR ARE SCOT FREE IN HINDUSTAN.

...................================

................What is this going on?

Arrest Abdullah Bukhari and abolish Azan and Namaz

Apropos to the front page news, "Keep off riot victim: SC to Gujarat cops", as an Indian Citizen, I seek explanation of M/s A.R. Lakshman J. & S. Rajendra Babu J. as to what are they doing on my several applications, which have been published in my news magazine 'Mujahana' also, for arrest of self proclaimed ISI agent & proclaimed offender Abdullah Bukhari, ex. Shahi Imam of Zama Masjid? I had been arrested by the terrorist dictator proletariat Delhi Police and a judicial terrorist Raj Rani Mitra MM is trying the case in Tis Hazari Courts vide FIRs 10 & 110/2001 PS NIA, who never arrest this criminal Jihadi Abdullah Bukhari. Nay! Even Delhi High Court evaded action even after filing PIL! Nay! In his Wazookhana construction case, another terrorist LG Vijaya Kapoor submitted application for stopping trial. Nay! MM M.S. Rohilla, who dared to issue NBW against Abdullah Bukhari, had been pleased to resign from service!

Circumstances suggest that the notorious terrorists of judiciary are after Shri Narendra Modi, the Chief Minister of Gujarat, who is the one and only protector of hapless Hindus, to whom Democracy is hell bent to annihilate with the help of guide of criminals named the Indian Constitution.

May one note that Bilkis Yakub Rasool is breeding enemies of human race, (even her own enemies, because there are yet another minority community named Christians who have been commanded by Bible's Jehovah vide Isaiah 13:16 to ravish Bilkis Yakub Rasool in front of her own near and dear) who would cry from the mast of mosque that Allah alone can be worshipped. As per Koran, Chapter The Prophets(21), Verse 98, those who worship other gods save criminal Allah, are fuel of hell and must be liquidated (Koran 2:191); because persecution is worst than slaughter! Why such woman and ISI agent Abdullah Bukhari should get protection and Modi should not?

The answer can easily be traced in the guide of criminals named Article 29(1) of the Indian Constitution, which gives these criminals unfettered fundamental right to conserve the very culture of murder, plunder and rape to which revered Shri Narendra Modi is opposing.

There are yet other cases of atrocities upon Hindus of Kashmir, Nagaland and Mizoram. While the properties of the victims are being usurped, even today, by Muslims and Christians with the full support of these States, they are getting peace bonuses by Atal Government. Who would take to the task to these States? Why Gujarat should be singled out?

Why these judicial terrorist Governments should not resign and Narendra Modi Government alone should resign?

Apt.

Thanking you with best regards,

Ayodhya Prasad Tripathi, (President)

Manav Raksha Sangh,

Web Site; http://www.aryavrt.com


Annexure-s5

In the matter of FIR 440/96

State V/s Ayodhya Prasad Tripathi

Police Station Roop Nagar Delhi North

Priyadarshini Mattoo (Kashmiri: प्रियदर्शिनी मट्टू, پریدرشینی مٹو ) (July 23, 1970 - January 23, 1996) was a 25-year-old law student who was found raped and murdered at her house in New Delhi on January 23, 1996. On October 17, 2006, the Delhi High Court found Santosh Kumar Singh guilty on both counts of rape and murder and on October 30 of the same year sentenced him to death. On October 6, 2010, the Supreme Court of India commuted the death sentence to life imprisonment. Santosh Kumar Singh, the son of a Police Inspector-General, had earlier been acquitted by a trial court in 1999, and the High Court decision was widely perceived in Indiaas a landmark reversal and a measure of the force of media pressure in a democratic setup. This decision went in favor because the facts were not presented correctly in the lower court. The intense media spotlight also led to an accelerated trial, unprecedented in the tangled Indian court system.

Significance of the case

The acquittal of Santosh Singh in 1999 had led to a massive public outcry and the investigating agency CBI, under considerable pressure, challenged the judgment in the Delhi high court on February 29, 2000. Public pressure mounted greatly after an acquittal verdict in the Jessica Lal case, where a number of accused including politician's son Manu Sharmawere released despite the murder taking place in a high-society bar in the presence of dozens of people.

Justices RS Sodhi and PK Bhasin of Delhi High Court shifted from a traditional lax pace, with hearings every few months, to a day-to-day trial and judgment was reached in 42 days. The original acquittal was overturned and Santosh Singh was found guilty of murder and rape.

The case is one of several in India that highlight the ineffectiveness of traditional criminal law system, especially when it comes to high profile perpetrators, including the Manu Sharma and Sanjeev Nanda acquittals.

Childhood

After Priyadarshini finished school from the Presentation Convent School in Srinagar, her family migrated to Jammu. There she completed her B Com from MAM College, before joining Delhi University for her LLB course.

By all accounts, Priyadarshini was a smart and beautiful young woman. She came from a musically talented family and was herself a good singer and guitar player. A friend has called her "a tom boy, not at all submissive, and very compassionate towards animals. A bubbly girl loaded with confidence..." [1]

It was in Delhi during her law course that Santosh Singh became besotted with her, and made indecent proposals. However, at one point he started stalking her, and her family lodged several FIR's with the police. A police escort was provided for some time, but in the end, the stalking continued.

The murder

Priyadarshini was in the third-year of her law program, when she was found strangled in her uncle’s residence. She had been raped, struck 14 times with a motorcycle helmet, and finally strangled with a wire. Santosh Kumar Singh, her senior in college, had been stalking and harassing her for several years, and was the immediate suspect. But Santosh came from an influential family - his father J.P. Singh was then Inspector General of Police in the Indian Union Territory of Pondicherry - in the course of the trial he served as Joint Commissioner of Police in Delhi, where the crime had been committed. In view of these connections, the court handed over investigation of the case to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI). In 1995, Priyadarshini had complained that Santosh Singh was harassing and stalking her. She had been provided with a personal security officer at the time. In retaliation, Santosh had lodged a complaint with the university alleging that she was pursuing two degrees simultaneously. However, it turned out that Priyadarshini had passed M.Com in 1991 and the complaint was merely malicious. On the morning of January 23, 1996, Santosh was seen knocking for entrance into Priyadarshini's uncle's house, where she was living, in the Vasant Kunj area of Delhi. A servant saw Santosh entering her house, apparently saying that he wanted a compromise in their legal complaints. Subsequently he raped her, strangled her with an electric wire and then battered her face beyond recognition with a motorcycle helmet. Santosh's presence in the house after the murder was also established by the prosecution.

Trial Court Judgment

Delivering the judgment in the trial court proceedings in 1999, the Additional Sessions Judge. G.P. Thareja said of Santosh, that though he knew that "he is the man who committed the crime," he was forced to acquit him, giving him the benefit of doubt.

In a 450 page judgment the judge came down heavily on the role of Delhi Police; “There has been particular inaction by Delhi Police”, he said, while commenting that the accused’s father may have used his official position to influence the agencies. “The influence of the father has been there in the matter and there was deliberate inaction” (at the time his father was second in command of the police forces in Delhi).

The helmet was found with a shattered safety glass - however the evidence was so poorly presented that the defense was able to discount it.

He further stated that the rule of law doesn’t seem to apply to the children of those who enforce it.

The Delhi police according to the judge, attempted to assist the accused during the investigation and trial. "Lalit Mohan, the Inspector was instrumental in creating false evidence and false defense for the accused. The witnesses of the police including a Sub-Inspector deposed falsely".

The judgment held the CBI responsible for unfair investigation and failure to produce Virender Prasad, Mattoo’s household help, which resulted in the obstruction of justice. The police had claimed Prasad had gone missing and was not traceable, yet in the aftermath a journalist could easily find him in his Bihar village.

The judge added that the CBI fabricated the DNA test in the rape case as it was not obtained in accordance with the judicial procedure and could not therefore be admitted in evidence in view of Section 45 of the Indian Evidence Act.

The "state had failed to bring home the charge of rape against the accused", and while indicting Santosh as "the man who committed the crime", the judge was constrained to acquit him, because of "the benefit of doubt".

High Court Appeal

Following a public outcry, the CBI then appealed the district court's verdict in Delhi High Court on February 29, 2000. Initially, the trial was not a priority, and there was no presentation of evidence or hearings in the Delhi High Court well into 2006. However, intense public scrutiny was mounted in the case after the acquittals in the Jessica Lal case, with Priyadarshini's aged father Chaman Lal Matoo making frequent appearances on TV, bringing the judiciary under intense pressure.

On August 31, 2006, six years after the initial appeal by CBI, justices RS Sodhi and PK Bhasin took up the case on a day-to-day hearing basis, which is extremely rare in India. Judgment was reached within 42 days which is quite unprecedented.

Verdict

On October 17, 2006, Santosh Singh, who meanwhile had married and become a practising lawyer in Delhi itself, was found guilty under Indian Penal Code sections 302 (murder) and 376 (rape). The verdict blames J.P. Thareja's original judgment:

The trial judge acquitted the accused amazingly taking a perverse approach. It murdered justice and shocked judicial conscience.

In particular, the verdict held that there were no lacunae in the DNA testing, and that the combination of the forensic and circumstantial evidence was clinching. However, the bench agreed with the trial's court observation that police were reluctant to act on repeated complaints of harassment and stalking against Singh as his father was the senior IPS officer (now retired) Director-General of Police J.P. Singh.

The verdict says "junior staff do not react to complaints against the relatives of their fraternity" and referred to the trial court's observation that the approach and working of the subordinate s taff of Delhi Police clearly reflected that the rule of law "is not meant for those who enforce the law nor for their near relatives". The verdict was reached on the basis of strong circumstantial evidence. Santosh's father J.P. Singh was in court. Priyadarshini's father expressed satisfaction that justice had been achieved ten years after the gruesome murder. The conviction will most probably be challenged in the Supreme Court of India, but the verdict and the process is seen as a barometer of a changing India. In particular, it is hoped now that media pressure can be brought to bear in the case of prominent accused such as Manu Sharma, Sanjeev Nanda or Vikas Yadav, and that eventually, the ability of the powerful to remain above the law would be curtailed.

Death penalty

As recommended by the Central Bureau of Investigation the death penalty was awarded to Santosh Singh on October 30, 2006.[2]

Pronouncing its verdict, the court said the mitigating circumstances under which leniency was begged for Santosh was not enough and the brutal rape and murder does fall in the bracket of "rarest of rare" cases. Santosh was sitting just five-feet away from the jam-packed court. The court had convicted Santosh of the crime earlier that month.

The two-judge bench, comprising Justice R. S. Sodhi and Justice P. K. Bhasin, heard both sides before pronouncing the verdict. The court said Santosh Singh had been given many chances to reform by the police when Priyadarshini had complained that he was stalking her. However, he didn't mend his ways and eventually raped and killed her.

"There is absolutely no doubt in our mind that what was required of Singh was exemplary behaviour being a son of police officer and a lawyer himself. Yet with a pre-meditated approach, he continued to harass the victim for two years," the Bench said.

"In spite of repeated warnings by the police and his undertakings to them, he went about committing the most ghastly act. The act itself sent ripples in society and showed how insecure a citizen can get against this kind of a person," the Bench remarked.

Supreme Court appeal

Santosh Singh appealed against the death penalty sentence to the Supreme Court of India on 19th Feb 07.[3] The court also issued a notice to the Central Bureau of Investigation on an appeal filed by the convict against the high court's judgment. The defense lawyers of the accused Santosh Singh questioned the validity of the DNA report one of the main causes why he was given the benefit of doubt in the Trial court.[4] Further the issue of Trial by Media is likely to be raised and whether excessive media coverage has influenced the verdict.[5][6]

In October 2010, the Supreme Court upheld the conviction of Santosh Kumar Singh but reduced the death sentence to life imprisonment.[7] Priyadarshini's father expressed disappointment with the CBI for failing to appeal against this decision.[8]

Post-conviction

Santosh Singh, post conviction, barely spent 4 months behind bars and was out on parole in March 2011. Upon return, he subsequently filed another application for grant of parole, subject matter of Criminal Writ Petition 224/2012 before Delhi High Court. The High Court granted him a parole of another one-month on March 6, 2012.[9]

 


Annexure-s5a

In the matter of FIR 440/96

State V/s Ayodhya Prasad Tripathi

Police Station Roop Nagar Delhi North

 

http://intellibriefs.blogspot.in/2005/02/imam-and-shankaracharya-not-rule-of.html

FEBRUARY 08, 2005

Imam and Shankaracharya : Not the Rule of Law

Not the Rule of Law

Differing measures in cases against Imam and Shankeracharya

- D.P. Sinha I.A.S. Retd

In the context of the case filed by Tamil Nadu Govt. against Jayendra Saraswati, the Shankarcharya of Kanchi, the case filed by Govt. of NCT, Delhi against Ahmed Bukhari, Naib Imam of Jama Masjid of Delhi is of relevance.

A case against Ahmed Bukhari was filed by Delhi Police in the court of Shri Vinod Kumar Sharma, Metropolitan Magistrate, Delhi without the arrest of the accused u/s 124-A, IPC in May 1993, on the basis of FIR No. 98/93 dated 14.05.93. The allegations were that the accused on 22.01.93 had incited the Muslim congregation, that had collected at Jama Masjid for 'Namaz', against the Govt. to boycott the Republic Day celebrations. The court summoned the accused on 16.10.93 for appearance in the court on 06.01.94.

On 06.01.94 summons were received back unserved. So fresh summons were issued for 27.05.94.

On 17.05.94 the counsel for the accused moved an application seeking exemption from attendance in the court, which was granted. And the case was adjourned to 31.01.95

Even after seven months accused did not turn up, so bailable warrant was issued on 31.01.95 and it was directed that it be served through SHO. for 07.02.95.

The S.H.O. did not serve the warrant as directed. The accused also did not appear in the court on 07.02.95. The court therefore ordered that non-bailable warrant be issued against the accursed for 01.06.95.

On 01.06.95 non-bailable warrant was received back unserved. So the Magistrate ordered that non-bailable warrant may again be issued for 19.08.95, to be served through DCP Shri P.N. Agarwal personally. But even the DCP failed to comply with the order of the Court.

He again directed the DCP to get the NBW served on the accused for 01.11.95 but it was received back unserved with the police report that the accused was not available at his address.

The Magistrate did not give up. He again ordered the D.C.P. Shri P.N. Agarwal to get the NBW served personally for 02.01.96. Still the court orders were not complied with and the NBW was returned to the court with the remarks that the accused was not available on the address.

The Magistrate gave up on the DCP and reverted back to SHO. He directed him to get the NBW served on the accused personally for 29.02.96.

By now police had successfully thwarted the orders of the Metropolitan Magistrate to ensure the presence of the accused in the court for more than two years. It is to be noted that the Magistrate has been very accommodative to the prosecution by giving adjournments from three to seven months, and by not drawing contempt proceedings against the S.H.O. and DCP Shri P.N. Agarwal, who had disobeyed the court orders with impunity and not served the warrants on the accused personally inspite the specific orders of the court in this regard.

But the patience of the Magistrate gave way at long last. By his order of 29th Feb., 96 he observed, "From the entire conduct of police it makes me think that why not a separate executing agency be there under the direct control of the judiciary. The judicial commands are often flouted and thwarted by the prosecuting agency for the reasons best known to them. It frustrates the judicial orders and commands. The helplessness of the judiciary is visible form the conduct of the police which shows that judicial officer is at the mercy of the prosecuting agency and it shows that rule of jungle prevails in the police department and not the rule of law".

The aforesaid order does reflect exasperation of the Magistrate with the system. At last he gathered courage to issue a show case notice to the SHO that why he should not be proceeded against u/s 60/122 D.P. Act. He also directed the Police Commissioner Nikhil Kumar to execute the non-bailable warrant against the accused within seven days.

The Criminal Writ Petition No. 138/96

The accused Ahmed Bukhari filed writ-petition No. 138/96 against the order of M.M. dated 29.02.96, for quashing the FIR against him and the aforesaid order of M.M. The Division Bench of the High Court comprising of the Chief Justice and Dr. Justice M.K. Sharma by their order of 06.03.96 admitted the petition and passed an interim order staying the execution of non-bailable warrant and further proceedings in the case against the accessed Bukhari pending in the court of M.M. Shri Vinod Kumar Sharma.

Move to withdraw the case by NCT. Govt.

While the above on Writ Petition was pending in the High Court, Govt of NCT decided to withdraw the case against the accused on the ground that it would be 'in the interest of justice and promote public peace and harmony amongst different sect of the society'. In effect the NCT Govt. upheld the view that if the supporters of a person accused of most heinous crimes are such that they may create large-scale disturbance and communal riots leading to arson. loot, murder and rape, the case against him should be withdrawn in the larger interest of public peace and communal harmony.

Accordingly, Asstt. Public Prosecuter filed the application u/s321 Cr.P.C. in the court of M.M. Shri Vinod Kumar Sharma, seeking to withdraw the above case.

Objection against withdrawal of the case

At this stage one Shyam Lal through his Advocate N.K. Gupta filed an application in the court of M.M. Shri V.K. Sharma on 02.01.97 objecting to the withdrawal of the case by Govt. of NCT. He submitted that he lived within the jurisdiction of Jama Masjid Police Station, where the inflammatory speech of the accused has created terror and as such he is an aggrieved party. He along with other residents of the area stoutly opposed the withdrawal of the case.

Shri Vinod Kumar Sharma, M.M. vide his detailed fourteen paged order dated 14.01.95 rejected the request of the prosecution (NCT Govt.) to withdrawal the case. He upheld the objection of the residents of the area against the withdraw of the case. He also cited profusely the case law and rulings of the Supreme Court in support of his order.

The Magistrate observed that "As per the allegation of the prosecution accused has made an attempt to overthrew the government established by law. No individual can be allowed to challenge the very existence of the state. No administration of justice would be served by withdrawing the case against him, without any material placed before the court and where court exercises its judicial function".

The M.M. also cited Subhash Chander vs State (1980 SCR page - 44) in which Justice Krishna Aiyer had held that "the even course of criminal justice cannot be thwarted by the Executive, however high the accused, however sure the government feels a case is false, however unpalatable the continuance of the prosecution to the powers that be, who wish to scuttle the course of justice because of hubris of action, or other noble or ignoble consideration. Once the prosecution is launched, its relentless course cannot be halted except on consideration germane to justice".

The prosecution (NCT Govt.) had sought to withdraw the case against accused Abdulla Bukhari on the ground that it would be 'in the interest of justice and promote public peace and harmony amongst the different sects of the society'. It was not considered an adequate reason to permit the withdrawal of the case and MM Shri Vinod Kumar Sharma rejected it vide his order of 14.01.97. He observed: "As per the allegation of the prosecution the accused has made an attempt to overthrow govt. established by law. He has challenged the sovereignty of the State. No individual can be allowed to challenge the very existence of the State, No administration of justice would be served by withdrawing the case against him without any objective material placed before the court and where court exercises its judicial direction." He further observed that "In the absence of any description from the prosecution, I am at loss to understand that what are the considerations or compulsions before the state that the present case is being withdrawn from the proscription". He dismissed the plea of the prosecution to withdraw the case.

The Revision Petition

The NCT Govt. filed revision petition No. 170 of 1997 in Delhi High Court against the aforesaid order of Metropolitan Magistrate. The major thrust of the petition was "it would be extremely deterrent to the social fabric of the society and the religious harmony prevailing in the capital. In fact, the continuance of the prosecution may arouse extreme feelings of bitterness, violence and disturbance in the prevalent peaceful atmosphere in the country".

A careful reading of the aforesaid petition would show that the prosecution (read government of the day) apprehended that if accused Syed Ahmed Bukhari was arrested and case is continued against him, his volatile supporters will plunge the country into violent conflagration, precipitating Hindu-Muslim riots resulting in loss of human life and property. The Govt was frightened and terrorized and therefore wanted to withdraw the case to prevent such a possibility.

The NCT Govt. in its revision petition also sought to undermine gravity of the offence u/s 124-A, I.P.C. and submitted that the speech could have been delivered as a natural reaction to demolition of Babri Mosque. It is interesting to note the volte-face of the NCT Govt. The same government which had slapped the case against the accused of a grave offence u/s 124-A, IPC was now dragging feet, and wanted the case to be withdrawn.

The Revision Petition came up for hearing Justice J.K. Mehra who in his judgment dated mentioned that "Since the prosecution appears to have emanated form certain allegedly inflammatory statements attributed to the accused, I considered it appropriate to call the respondent accused and to ascertain his stand in the presence of his counsel as well as State Counsel. The said respondent-accused stated before the court that 'he accepted the validity of the Constitution of India and the Rule of Law established in this country and categorically stated that he did not challenge the constitution or Rule of Law established in the country and that he is governed by the same. He accepted that India is his country and he is one of the citizens of India. He stated that he had intended to criticize certain policies being pursued by the then Govt. of India. In the light of this discussion and further subsequent to the alleged incident there have been no complaints against the behavior of the accused, trial court should have exercised its discretion in favour of allowing the application".

In the concluding para of his judgment Justice J.K. Mehra observed: that 'keeping the fact that the present application was filed without any malafide and with the bonafide intention of securing peace, harmony and public order in the society, I consider that the trial court has erred in declining the application for withdrawal of application.... the application of the state for dropping the prosecution is allowed and the respondent accused is discharged-'

Suming up

Section 124-A, IPC is a cognizable offence, under which police usually arrests the accused person, as soon as a FIR is lodged. But no such arrest was made by Jama Masjid Police Station of Delhi for fear of law and order problem. The case was filed in the court of the Metropolitan Magistrate Shri Vinod Kumar Sharma in May 1993 but till 29th February 1996, he could not secure the presence of the accused in the court, inspite of innumerable summons/NBWs/warrants he issued. The police stubbornly refused to comply with the orders of the court. At long last, when he ordered the police commissioner Nikhil Kumar to excute the NBW on the accused, the accused filed the writ petition and secured stay order from the high court. During the pendency of the writ petition the NCT Govt. took the decision to withdraw the case on the ground that the continuance of the case would jeopardize the law and order situation. It is the same ground for which the police did not arrest Ahmed Bukhari although he was accussed of committing an offence u/s 124 I.P.C.

When some residents of the area objected against the withdrawal of the case and the Magistrate upheld their objection refusing to give permission to withdraw the case, NCT Govt. filed revision petition against the order of the Magistrate on the same ground of maintenance of public peace and order. In effect, the High Court allowed the appeal and permitted the case to be withdrawn by the NCT Govt. An extra-ordinary and an unprecedented act of the Delhi High Court deserve mention. Justice S.K. Mehra summoned the accused to the High Court and examined him in respect of the allegations against him. The accused, naturally denied the allegations. His denial and assurance for good conduct in future, and the fact that there had been no complaints against the behavior of the accused, subsequent to the incident in question, convinced the honourable Judge to the extent that he allowed NCT Govt. to withdraw the case. Thus the High Court also laid down a precedent. If a person is accused of a theft and it is found that he has not committed another theft subsequent to that incident, the case should be withdrawn against him. The High Court also did not take adverse note of the willful non-compliance of orders of a judicial authority by police for service of summons/warrants/NBWs. against the accused for about two and a half years.

In brief, even though offence u/s 124-A IPC is a cognizable offence, police did not arrest the accused and did not serve summons/warrants/NBWs on him and NCT Govt. withdrew the case against him for just one reason that he has a following of a mob that may endanger public peace and tranquility. The High Court also found it to be a valid reason to withdraw the case.

NCT Govt. neither had the courage nor the will to arrest and proceed against the Ahmed Bukhari. But the case of Shankarcharya is different. Shankarcharya does not have a following of mobs that may endanger public peace and religious amity. So why should Tamil Nadu Govt. worry? It is the lamb that is scarified and not the wolf.

Posted by Naxal Watch at 7:22 AM

 


Annexure-s6                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               

In the matter of FIR 440/96

State V/s Ayodhya Prasad Tripathi

Police Station Roop Nagar Delhi North

Cites 13 docs [View All]

The Constitution Of India 1949

Article 368 in The Constitution Of India 1949

Article 392 in The Constitution Of India 1949

The Amending Act, 1901

Article 13 in The Constitution Of India 1949

Citedby 26 docs [View All]

I. C. Golaknath & Ors vs State Of Punjab & Anrs.(With ... on 27 February, 1967

Kesavananda Bharati ... vs State Of Kerala And Anr on 24 April, 1973

Sajjan Singh vs State Of Rajasthan(With ... on 30 October, 1964

Kihoto Hollohan vs Zachillhu And Others on 18 February, 1992

Shri Kihota Hollohon vs Mr. Zachilhu And Others on 18 February, 1992

Supreme Court of India

Sri Sankari Prasad Singh Deo vs Union Of India And State Of ... on 5 October, 1951

Equivalent citations: 1951 AIR 458, 1952 SCR 89

Bench: Sastri, M Patanjali

PETITIONER:

SRI SANKARI PRASAD SINGH DEO

Vs.

RESPONDENT:

UNION OF INDIA AND STATE OF BIHAR(And Other Cases).

DATE OF JUDGMENT:

05/10/1951

BENCH:

SASTRI, M. PATANJALI

BENCH:

SASTRI, M. PATANJALI

KANIA, HIRALAL J. (CJ)

MUKHERJEA, B.K.

DAS, SUDHI RANJAN

AIYAR, N. CHANDRASEKHARA

CITATION:

1951 AIR 458 1952 SCR 89

CITATOR INFO :

F 1952 SC 252 (1,30)

RF 1954 SC 257 (4)

R 1959 SC 395 (28)

E&D 1959 SC 512 (4)

F 1965 SC 845 (20,21,23,24,25,27,33,35,38,39 R 1965 SC1636 (25)

O 1967 SC1643 (12,14,23,27,43,44,56,59,61,63 RF 1973 SC1461 (16,20,27,30,32,38,39,44,46,88 RF 1975 SC1193 (17)

RF 1975 SC2299 (649)

RF 1980 SC1789 (96)

RF 1980 SC2056 (61)

RF 1980 SC2097 (6)

D 1981 SC 271 (19,33,42,43)

RF 1986 SC1272 (78)

RF 1986 SC1571 (34)

RF 1987 SC1140 (3)

ACT:

Constitution (First Amendment) Act, 1951, Arts. 31A, 31B-Validity--Constitution of India, 1950, Arts. 13(2), 368, 379, 392--Provisional Parliament--Power to amend ConstitutionConstitution (Removal of Difficulties) Order No. 2 of 1950--Validity --Amendment of Constitution--Procedure--Bill amended by Legislature--Amendment curtailing fundamental rights--Amendment affecting land--Validity of Amending Act.

HEADNOTE:

The Constitution (First Amendment) Act, 1951, which has inserted, inter alia, Arts. 31A and 3lB in the Constitution of India is not ultra vires or unconstitutional. The provisional Parliament is competent to exercise the power of amending the Constitution under Art. 368. The fact that the said article refers to the two Houses of the Parliament and the President separately and not to the Parliament, does not lead to the inference that the body which is invested with the power to amend is not the Parliament but a different body consisting of the two Houses. The words "all the powers conferred by the provisions of this Constitution on Parliament" in Art. 379 are not confined to such powers as could be exercised by the provisional Parliament consisting of a single chamber, but are wide enough to include the power to amend the Constitution conferred by Art. 368.

The Constitution (Removal of Difficulties) Order No. 2 made by the President on the 26th January, 1950, which purports to adapt Art. 368 by omitting "either House of" and "in each House" and substituting "Parliament" for "that House" is not beyond the powers conferred on him by Art. 39:1 and ultra vires. There is nothing in Art. 392 to suggest that the President should wait, before adapting a particular article, till the occasion actually arose for the provisional Parliament to exercise the power conferred by the article. The view that Art. 368 is a complete code in itself in respect of the procedure provided by it and does not contemplate any amendment of a Bill for amendment of the Constitution after it has been introduced, and that if the Bill is amended during its passage through the House, the amendment Act cannot be said to have been passed in conformity with the procedure prescribed by Art. 368 and would be invalid, is erroneous.

Although "law" must ordinarily include constitutional law there is a clear demarcation between ordinary law which is made in the exercise of legislative power and constitutional law, which is made in the exercise of constituent power. In the context of Art. 13, "law" must be taken to mean rules or regulations made in exercise of ordinary legislative power and not amendments to the constitution made in the exercise of constituent power with the result that Art. 13(2) does not affect amendments made under Art.

368.

Articles 31A and 3lB inserted in the Constitution by the Constitution (First Amendment) Act, 1951, do not curtail the powers of the High Court under Art. 226 to issue writs for enforcement of any of the rights conferred by Part III or of the Supreme Court under Arts. 132 and 136 to entertain appeals from orders issuing or refusing such writs; but they only exclude from the purview of Part III 'certain classes of cases. These articles therefore do not require ratification under cl. (b) of the proviso to Art. 368. Articles 31A and 31B are not invalid on the ground that they relate to land which is a matter covered by the State List (item 18 of List II) as these articles are essentially amendments of the Constitution, and Parliament alone has the power to enact them.

JUDGMENT:

ORIGINAL JURISDICTION : Petitions under Art. 32 of the Constitution (Petitions Nos. 166,287,317 to 319, 371,372, 374 to 389, 392 to 395, 418, 481 to 485 of 1951). The facts which led to these petitions are stated in the judgment.

Arguments were heard on the l2th, l4th, l1th, 18th and 19th of September.

P.R. Das (B. Sen, with him) for the petitioners in Petitions Nos. 37 l, 372, 382,383, 388 and 392. Article 368 of the Constitution is a complete code in itself. It does not contemplate any amendments to the Bill 91

after its introduction. The Bill must be passed and assented to by the President as it was introduced without any amendment. As the Constitution Amendment Bill was amended in several respects during its passage through the Parliament, the Constitution (First Amendment) Act was not passed in conformity with the procedure laid down in article 368 and is therefore invalid. When the Parliament exercises its ordinary legislative powers it has power to amend the Bills under articles 107. 108, 109(3) & (4). It has no such power when it seeks to amend the Constitution itself as article 368 does not give any such power: of The Parliament Act of 1911 (of England). The Article 368 vests the power to amend the Constitution not in the Parliament but in a different body, viz., a two-thirds majority of the two Houses of the Parliament. In article 368, the word Parliament which occurs in other articles is purposely avoided. There is a distinction between ordinary legislative power and power to amend the Constitution. This distinction is observed in America and the power to amend the Constitution is vested there also in a different body. Vide Willis, page 875, Coolly Vol. 1. page 4, Orfield, page 146. Article 379 speaks of the power of the provisional Parliament as a legislative body. The powers under article 368 cannot be and was not intended to be exercised by the provisional Parliament under article 379. As it consists only of a Single Chamber the adaptations made in article 368 by the Constitution (Removal of Difficulties) Order No. 2 are ultra vires. Article 392 gives power to the President to remove only such difficulties as arise in the working of the Constitution. It cannot be used to remove difficulties in the way of amending the Constitution that have been deliberately introduced by the Constitution. No difficulty could have been possibly experienced in the working of the Constitution on the very day the Constitution came into force. The Constitution could legally be amended only by the Parliament consisting of two Houses constituted under clause 2 of Part V. In any event, the impugned Act is void under article 13 (2) as contravening the provisions relating to fundamental rights guaranteed by Part III. ' Law ' in article 13 (2) evidently includes all laws passed by the Parliament and must include laws passed under article 368 amending the Constitution: Constituent Assembly Debates, Vol. IX No. 37, pp. 1644, 1645, 1661, 1665. S.M. Bose (M. L. Chaturvedi, with him)for the petitioner in Petition No. 375. The word "only" in article 368 refers to all that follows and article 368 does not contemplate amendment of a Bill after it has been introduced. The President's Order is ultra rites his powers Under article 392. There is no difficulty in working article 368 and there could be no occasion for the President to adapt 368 in the exercise of his powers under article 392. S. Chaudhuri (M. L. Chaturvedi, with him) for the petitioner in Petition No. 368 adopted the arguments of P.R. Das and S.M. Bose.

S.K. Dhar (Nanakchand and M.L. Chaturvedi, with him) for the petitioner in Petition No387. Article 379 on which the provisional Parliament's jurisdiction to amend the Constitution is based not only empowers the said Parliament to exercise the powers of the Parliament but also imposes upon it the obligation to perform all the duties enjoined upon the Parliament by the Constitution. Hence Parliament cannot seek to abridge the rights of property of the citizens guaranteed by Part III. As the present Act contravenes the provisions of Part III, it is void under article 13 (2). In any event, the new articles 31A and 3lB curtail the powers of the Supreme Court under articles 32, 132 and 136 and those of the High Court under article 226, and as such, they required ratification under clause (b) of the proviso to article 368 and not having been ratified, they are void and unconstitutional. They are also ultra vires as they relate to land, a subject matter covered by List II (see item 18) over which the State Legislatures have exclusive power. Parliament cannot make a law validating a law which it had no power to enact.

N.P. Asthana (K. B. Asthana, with him) for the petitioners in Petitions Nos. 481 to 484. Article 338 s, does not confer power on any body to amend the constitution. It simply lays down the procedure to be followed for amending the Constitution. In this view u article 379 does not come into operation at all. Under article 392 the President himself can alter the Constitution but he cannot authorise the provisional Parliament to do so.

S.P. Sinha (Nanak Chand, with him) for the petitioner in Petition No. 485. Article 13(2) is very wide in its scope and it invalidates all laws past, present and future which seek to curtail the rights conferred by Part II 1. It does not exempt laws passed under article 368 from its operation. N.C. Chatterjee (with V.N. Swami for the petitioner in PetitiOn No. 287 and with Abdul Razzak Khan for the petitioner in Petition No. 318). Article 368 must be read subject to article 13(2). Articles 31A and 31IB are legislative in character and were enacted in the exercise of the law-making power of the Parliament and not in the exercise of any power to amend the Constitution and Parliament has no power to validate the laws as it had no power to enact them. N.R. Raghavachari (V. N. Swami, with him) for the petitioner in Petition No. 166. The fundamental rights are supreme and article 13 (2) is a complete bar to any amendment of the rights cenferred by Part III.

N.S.. Bindra (Kahan Chand Chopra, with him) for the petitioner in Petition No. 319.

M.L. Chaturvedi for the petitioners in Petitions Nos. 374,376, 377, 379, 380, 381,384, 385, 386, 389, 393, 394 and 395.

Bishan Singh for the petitioner in Petition No. 418. Abdul Razzak Khan and P. 5. Safeer for the petitioner in Petition No. a17.

M.C. Setalvad, Attorney-General for India (with G.N. Joshi) for the Union of India, and (with Lal Narain Singh, G N. Joshi, A. Kuppuswami and G. Durgabai) for the State of Bihar. The donee of the power under article 368 is Parliament. and The process of the passage of the Bill indicated in the said article is the same as that of ordinary legislative Bills. The article does not mean that the powers under article 368 are to be exercised by a fluctuating body of varying majority and not by Parliament. If the constituent authority and the legislative authority are two different entities the saving clauses in articles 2,3, 4 and 240, will be meaningless. Under article 379 provisional Parliament can exercise all the powers of Parliament; hence Provisional Parliament can act under article 368. "All the powers" in article 379 include power to amend the Constitution and there is no reason to restrict the import of these words by excluding amendment of the Constitution from their ambit. The words "perform all the duties" in that article do not in any manner cut down the power of Parliament under article 379 because article 13 (2) does not impose any duty. There is no conflict between exercising all the powers under article 379 and the prohibition in article 13 (2). No technical meaning should be given to the word "difficulty" in article 392 (1). The adaptation of article 368 is really an adaptation for the removal of difficulties. The adaptation is not of a permanent character. This shows that the adaptation is not an amendment and even if it is an amendment, it is so by way of adaptation. Article 13 (2) prohibits "laws" inconsistent with fundamental rights. It cannot affect article 368 since the word "law" in article 13 (2) refers to ordinary legislative enactments and not constitution making. The argument that the Bill to amend the Constitution should be passed as introduced, without amendments, is fallacious. It cannot be said that the Bill referred to in article 368 has to be dealt with under a procedure different from that laid down for ordinary Bills in articles 107 and 108. Articles 31-A and 31B are not legislative in character. The said articles do not affect the scope of articles 226 and 32, for the power of the Court under the said two articles 95 remains unaltered. What has been done is to alter the content of fundamental rights.

P.L. Banerjee, Advocate-General of Uttar Pradesh (U. K. Misra and Gopalji Mehrotra, with him) for the State of Uttar Pradesh adopted the arguments of the un. Attorney-General and added that articles 31-A and 31-B st do not necessarily stand or fall together; even if 31-B goes, 31-A will remain. T.L. Shevde, Advocate-General of Madhya Pradesh (T. P. Naik, with him)for the State of Madhya Pradesh adopted the arguments of the Attorney General. The Provisional Parliament is competent to do all that the future Parliament can do. The adaptation under article 392 does not seek to amend article 368.

P.R. Dots, S.M. Bose S. Chaudhuri, N.C. Chatterjee, S.K. Dhar and S.P. Sinha replied.

1951. October 5.

The Judgment of the Court was delivered by PATANJALI SASTRI J.—

These petitions, which have been heard together, raise the common question whether the Constitution (First Amendment) Act, 1951, which was recently passed by the present provisional Parliament and purports to insert, inter alia, articles 31A and 3lB in the Constitution Of India is ultra vires and unconstitutional. What led to that enactment is a matter of common knowledge. The political party now in power, commanding as it does a majority of votes in the several State legislatures as well as in Parliament, carried out certain measures of agrarian reform in Bihar, Uttar Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh by enacting legislation which may compendiously be referred to as Zemindary Abolition Acts. Certain zemindars, feeling themselves aggrieved, attacked the validity of those Acts in courts of law on the ground that they contravened the fundamental rights conferred on them by Part III of the Constitution. The High Court at Patna held that the Act passed in Bihar was unconstitutional while the 96 High Courts at Allahabad and Nagpur upheld the validity of the corresponding legislation in Uttar Pradesh and, Madhya Pradesh respectively. Appeals from those decisions are pending in this Court. Petitions filed in this Court by some other zemindars seeking the determination of the same question are "also pending. At this stage, the Union Government, with a view to put an end to all this litigation and to remedy what they considered to be certain defects brought to light in the working of the Constitution, brought forward a bill to amend the Constitution, which, after undergoing amendments in various particulars, was passed by the: requisite majority as the Constitution (First Amendment) Act, 1951, (hereinafter referred to as the Amendment Act). Swiftly reacting to this move of the Government, the zemindars have brought the present petitions under article 32 of the Constitution impugning the Amendment Act itself as unconstitutional and void.

The main arguments advanced in support of the petitions may be summarised as follows:

First, the power of amending the Constitution provided for under article 368 was conferred not on Parliament but on the two Houses of Parliament as a designated body and, therefore, the provisional Parliament was not competent to exercise that power under article 379.

Secondly, assuming that the power was conferred on Parliament, it did not devolve on the provisional Parliament by virtue of article 379 as the words "All the powers conferred by the provisions of this Constitution on Parliament" could refer only to such powers as are capable of being exercised by the provisional Parliament consisting of a single chamber. The power conferred by article 368 calls for the co-operative action of two Houses of Parliament and could be appropriately exercised only by the Parliament to be duly constituted under Ch. 2 of Part V. Thirdly, the Constitution (Removal of Difficulties) Order No. 2 made by the President on 26th January 97 1950, in so far as it purports to adapt article 368 by omitting "either House of" and "in each House" and substituting "Parliament" for" that House", is beyond the powers conferred on him by article 392, as "any difficulties" sought to be removed by adaptation under that article must be difficulties in the actual working of the Constitution during the transitional period whose removal is necessary for carrying on the Government. No such difficulty could possibly have been experienced on the very date of the commencement of the Constitution.

Fourthly, in any case article 368 is a complete code in itself and does not provide for any amendment being made in the bill after it has been introduced in the House. The bill in the present case having been admittedly amended in several particulars during its passage through the House, the Amendment Act cannot be said to have been passed in conformity with the procedure prescribed in article 368. Fifthly, the Amendment Act, in so far as it purports to take away or abridge the rights conferred by Part III of the Constitution, falls within the prohibition of article 13 (2).

And lastly, as the newly inserted articles 31A and 3lB seek to make changes in articles 132 and 136 in Chapter IV of Part V and article 226 in Chapter V of Part VI, they require ratification under clause (b) of the proviso to article 368, and not having been so ratified, they are void and unconstitutional. They are also ultra vires as they relate to matters enumerated in List II, with respect to which the State legislatures and not Parliament have the power to make laws.

Before dealing with these points it will be convenient to set out here the material portions of articles 368, 379 and 392, on the true construction of which these arguments have largely turned.

368. An amendment of this Constitution may be initiated only by the introduction of a Bill for the purpose in either House of Parliament, and when the Bill is passed in each House 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, it shall be presented to the President for his assent and upon such assent being given to the Bill, the Constitution shall stand amended in accordance with the terms of the Bill:

Provided that if such amendment seeks to make any change (a) articles 54, 55, 78,162 or 241, or (b) Chapter IV of Part V, Chapter V of Part VI, or Chapter I of Part XI, or

(c) any of the Lists in the Seventh Schedule, or (d) the representation of States in Parliament, or (e) the provisions of this article, the amendment shall also require to be ratified by the Legislatures of not less than one-half of the States specified in Parts A and B of the First Schedule by resolutions to that effect passed by those Legislatures before the Bill making provision for such amendment is presented to the President for assent.

379. (1) Until both Houses of Parliament have been duly constituted and summoned. to meet for the first session under the provisions of this Constitution, the body functioning as the Constituent Assembly of the Dominion of India immediately 'before the commencement of this' Constitution shall be the provisional Parliament and shall exercise all the powers and perform all the duties conferred by the provisions of this Constitution on Parliament.

392. (1) The President may, for the purpose of removing any difficulties, particularly in relation to the transition from the provisions of the Government of India Act, 1935, to the provisions of this Constitution, by order direct that this Constitution shall, during such period as may be specified in the order, have effect subject to such adaptations, whether by way of modification, addition or omission, as he may deem to be necessary or expedient: Provided that no such order shall be made after the first meeting of Parliament duly constituted under Chapter II of Part V.

* * * *

On the 'first point, it was submitted that whenever the Constitution sought to confer a power upon Parliament, it specifically mentioned "Parliament" as the done of the power, as in articles 2, 3, 33, 34 and numerous other articles, but it deliberately avoided the use of that expression in article 368. Realising that the Constitution, as the fundamental law of the country, should not be liable to frequent changes according to the whim of party majorities, the framers placed special difficulties in the way of amending the Constitution and it was a part of that scheme to confer the power of amendment on a body other than the ordinary legislature, as was done by article 5 of the American Federal Constitution. We are unable to take that view. Various methods of constitutional amendment have been adopted in written constitutions, such as by referendum, by a special convention, by legislation under a special procedure, and so on. But, which of these methods the framers of the Indian Constitution have adopted must be ascertained from the relevant provisions of the Constitution itself without any leaning based on a priori grounds or the analogy of other constitutions in favour of one method in preference to another. We accordingly turn to the provisions dealing with constitutional amendments.

Now, the Constitution provides for three classes of amendments of its provisions. First, those that can be effected by a bare majority such as that required for the passing of any ordinary law. The amendments contemplated in articles 4, 169 and 240 fall within this class, and they are specifically excluded from the purview of article 368. Secondly, those that Can be effected by a special majority as laid down in article 368. All constitutional amendments other than those referred to above come within this category and must be effected by a majority of the total membership of each House as well as by a majority of not less than two thirds of the members of that House present and a voting; and thirdly, those that require, in addition to the special majority above-mentioned, ratification by resolutions passed by not less than one-half of the States specified in Parts A and B of 'the First Schedule. This class comprises amendments which seek to make any change in the provisions referred to in the proviso to article 368. It will be seen that the power of effecting the first class of amendments is explicitly conferred on "Parliament", that is to say, the two Houses of Parliament and the President (article 79). This would lead one to suppose, in the absence of a clear indication to the contrary, that the power of effecting the other two classes of amendments has also been conferred on the same body, namely, Parliament, for, the requirement of a different majority, which is merely procedural, can by itself be no reason for entrusting the power to a different body. An examination of the language used in article 368 confirms that view. In the first place, it is provided that the amendment must be initiated by the introduction of a "bill in either' House of Parliament", a familiar feature of parliamentary procedure (of. article 107(1) which says "A bill may originate in either House of Parliament"). Then, the bill must be "passed in each House" just what Parliament does when it is called upon to exercise its normal legislative function [article 107(2)]; and finally, the bill thus passed must be "presented to the President"' for his "assent", again a parliamentary process through which every bill must pass before it can reach the statute-book (article 111). We thus find that each of the component units of Parliament is to play its allotted part in bringing about an amendment to the Constitution. We have already seen that Parliament effects amendments of the first class mentioned above by going through the same three-fold procedure but with a simple majority. The fact that a different majority in the same body is required for effecting the second and third categories of amendments cannot make the amending agency a different body. There is no force, therefore, in the suggestion that Parliament would have been referred to specifically if that body was intended to exercise the power. Having mentioned each House of Parliament and the President separately and assigned to each its appropriate part in bringing about constitutional changes, the makers of the Constitution presumably did not think it necessary to refer to the collective designation of the three units. Apart from the intrinsic indications in article 368 referred to above, a convincing argument is to be found in articles 2, 3, 4, 169 and 240. As already stated, under these articles power is given to "Parliament" to make laws by a bare majority to amend certain parts of the Constitution; but in each case it is laid down that no such law should be deemed to be an amendment of the Constitution "for the purpose of article 368." It would be quite unnecessary, and indeed inappropriate, to exclude these laws from the operation of article 368, which requires a. special majority, if the power to amend under the latter article was not also given to Parliament.

Somewhat closely allied to the point discussed above is the objection based on the bill in the present case having been passed in an amended form, and not as originally introduced. It is not correct to say that article 368 is a "complete code" in respect of the procedure provided by it. There are gaps in the procedure as to how and after what notice a bill is to be introduced, how it is to be passed by each House and how the President's assent is to be obtained. Evidently, the rules made by each House under article 118 for regulating its procedure and the conduct of its business were intended, so far as may be, to be applicable. There was some discussion at the. Bar as to whether the process of amending the Constitution was a legislative process. Petitioners' counsel insisted that it was not, and that, therefore, the "legislative procedure" prescribed in article 107, which specifically provides for a bill being passed with amendments, was not applicable to a bill for amending the Constitution under article 368. The argument was further supported by pointing out that if amendment of such a bill were permissible, it must be open to either House to propose and pass amendments, and in case the two Houses failed to agree, the whole machinery of article 368 would be thrown out of gear, for the joint sitting of both Houses passing the bill by a simple majority provided for in article 108 in the case of ordinary bills would be inapplicable in view of the special majority required in article 368. The argument proceeds on a misconception. Assuming that amendment of the Constitution is not legislation even where it is carried out by the ordinary legislature by passing a bill introduced for the purpose and that articles 107 to 111 cannot in terms apply when Parliament is dealing with a bill under article 368, there is no obvious reason why Parliament should not adopt, on such occasions, its own normal procedure, so far as that procedure can be followed consistently with statutory requirements. Repelling the contention that a Local Government Board conducting a statutory enquiry should have been guided by the procedure of a court of justice, Lord Haldane observed in Local Government Board v. Arlidge(1): "Its (the Board's) character is that of an organisation with executive functions. In this it resembles other great departments of the State. When, therefore, Parliament entrusts it with judicial duties, Parliament must be taken, in the absence of any declaration to the contrary, to have intended to follow the procedure which is its own and is necessary if it is to be capable of doing its work efficiently."

These observations have application here. Having provided for the constitution of a Parliament and prescribed a certain procedure for the conduct of' its ordinary legislative business to be supplemented by rules made by each House (article 118), the makers of the Constitution must be taken to have intended (1) [1915] A.C. 120.

Parliament to follow that procedure, so far as it may be applicable, consistently with the express provisions of article 368, when they entrusted to it the power of amending the Constitution,.

The argument that a power entrusted to a Parliament consisting two Houses cannot be exercised under article 379 by the provisional Parliament sitting as a single chamber overlooks the scheme of the constitutional provisions in regard to Parliament. These provisions envisage a Parliament of two Houses functioning under the Constitution framed as they have been on that basis. But the framers were well' aware that such a Parliament could not be constituted till after the first elections were held under the Constitution. It thus became necessary to make provision for the carrying on, in the meantime, of the work entrusted to Parliament under the Constitution. Accordingly, it was provided in article 379 that the Constituent Assembly should function as the provisional Parliament during the transitional' period and exercise all the powers and perform all the duties conferred by the Constitution on Parliament. Article 379 should be viewed and interpreted in the wider perspective of this scheme and not in its isolated relation to article 368 alone. The petitioners' argument that the reference in article 368 to "two Houses" makes that provision inapplicable to the provisional Parliament would equally apply to all the provisions of the Constitution in regard to Parliamentary action and, if accepted, would rob article 379 of its very purpose and meaning. It was precisely to obviate such an argument and to remove the difficulty on which it is rounded and other difficulties of a like nature in working the Constitution during the transitional period that the framers of the Constitution made the further provision in article 392 conferring a general power on the President to adapt the provisions of the' Constitution by suitably modifying their terms. This brings us to the construction of article 392.

It will be seen that the purpose for which an adaptation may be made under that article is widely expressed. It may be made for the purpose of removing "any difficulties". The particularisation of one class of difficulties which follows is illustrative and cannot have the effect of circumscribing the scope of the preceding general words. It has been urged, however, that the condition precedent to the exercise of powers under article 392 is the existence of difficulties to be removed, that is to say, difficulties actually experienced in the working of the Constitution whose removal would be necessary for carrying on the Government, such as for instance, the difficulties connected with applying articles 112, 113, etc., in the transitional period. But, the argument proceeds, constitutional amendments cannot be said to be necessary during that period. Besides, amendment of the Constitution is a very serious thing, and hence, by providing that both Houses must deliberate and agree to the amendment proposed and pass the bill by a special majority, the Constitution has purposely placed difficulties in the way of amending its provisions. It would be fantastic to suppose that, after deliberately creating those difficulties, it has empowered the President to remove them by a stroke of his pen. We see no force in this line of argument. It is true enough to say that difficulties must exist before they can be removed by adaptation, but they can exist before an occasion for their removal actually arises. As already stated, difficulties are bound to arise in applying provisions, which, by their terms are applicable to a Parliament of two Houses. to the provisional Parliament sitting as a single chamber. Those difficulties, arising as they do out of the inappropriateness of the language of those provisions as applied to the provisional Parliament, have to be removed by modifying that language to fit in with the situation created by article 379. There is nothing in that article to suggest that the President should wait, before adapting a particular article, till an occasion actually arose for the provisional Parliament to exercise the power conferred by that article. Nor is there any question here of the President removing by his adaptation any of the difficulties which the Constitution 105 has deliberately placed in the way of its amendment. The adaptation leaves the requirement of a special majority untouched. The passing of an amendment bill by both Houses is no more a special requirement of such a bill than it is of any ordinary law made by Parliament. We are, therefore, of opinion that the adaptation of article 368 by the President was well within the powers conferred on him by article 892 and is valid and constitutional.

A more plausible argument was advanced in support of the contention that the Amendment Act, in so far as it purports to take away or abridge any of the fundamental rights, falls within the prohibition of article 13(2) which provides that "the State shall not make any law which takes away or abridges the rights conferred by this Part and any law made in contravention of this clause shall to the extent of the contravention be void." The argument was put thus: "The State" includes Parliament (article 12)and "law" must include a constitutional amendment. It was the deliberate intention of the framers of the Constitution, who realized the sanctity of the fundamental rights conferred by Part III, to make them immune from interference not only by ordinary laws passed by the legislatures in the country but also from constitutional amendments. It is not uncommon to find in written constitutions a declaration that certain fundamental rights conferred on the people should be "eternal and inviolate" as for instance article 11 of the Japanese Constitution. Article 5 of the American Federal Constitution provides that no amendment shall be made depriving any State without its consent "of its equal suffrage in the Senate." The framers of the Indian Constitution had the American and the Japanese models before them, and they must be taken to have prohibited even constitutional amendments in derogation of fundamental rights by using aptly wide language in article 13 (2). The argument is attractive, but there are other important considerations which point to the opposite conclusion.

Although "law" must ordinarily include constitutional law, there is a clear demarcation between ordinary law, which is made in exercise of legislative power, and constitutional law, which is made in exercise of constituent power. Dicey defines constitutional law as including "all rules which directly or indirectly affect the distribution or the exercise of the sovereign power in the State." It is thus mainly concerned with the creation of the three great organs of the State, the executive, the legislature and the judiciary, the distribution of governmental power among them and the definition of their mutual relation. No doubt our constitution-makers, following the American model, have incorporated certain fundamental rights in Part III and made them immune from interference by laws made by the State. We find it, however,difficult, in the absence of a clear indication to the contrary, to suppose that they also intended to make those rights immune from constitutional amendment. We are inclined to think that they must have had in mind what is of more frequent occurrence, that is, invasion of the rights of the subjects by the legislative and the executive organs of the State by means of laws and rules made in exercise of their legislative power and not the abridgement or nullification of such rights by alterations of the Constitution itself in exercise of sovereign constituent power. That power, though it has been entrusted to Parliament, has been so hedged about with restrictions that its exercise must be difficult and rare. On the other hand, the terms of article 36a are perfectly general and empower Parliament to amend the Constitution, without any exception whatever. Had it been intended to save the fundamental rights from the operation of that provision, it would have been perfectly easy to make that intention clear by adding a proviso to that effect. In short, we have here two articles each of which is widely phrased, but conflicts in its operation with the other. Harmonious construction requires that one should be read as controlled and qualified by the other. Having regard to the considerations adverted to above, we are of opinion that in the context of article 13 "law" must be taken to mean rules or regulations made in exercise of ordinary legislative power and not amendments to the Constitution made in exercise of constituent power, with the result that article 1:3(2) does not affect amendments made under article 368.

It only remains to deal with the objections particularly directed against the newly inserted articles 31A and :3lB. One of these objections is based on the absence of ratification under article 368. It was said that, before these articles were inserted by the Amending Act, the High Courts had the power under article 226 of the Constitution to issue appropriate writs declaring the Zemindari Abolition Acts unconstitutional as contravening fundamental rights, and this Court could entertain appeals from the orders of the High Courts under article 132 or article 136. As a matter of fact, some High Courts had. exercised such powers and this Court had entertained appeals. The new articles, however, deprive the High Courts as well as this Court of the power of declaring the said Acts unconstitutional, and thereby seek to make changes in Ch. 4 of Part V and Ch. 5 of Part VI. It was therefore submitted that the newly inserted articles required ratification under the proviso to article 368. The argument proceeds on a misconception. These articles so far as they are material here, run thus :-31A. Saving of laws providing for acquisition of estates, etc.--(1) Notwithstanding anything in the foregoing provisions of this part, no law providing for the acquisition by the State of any estate or of any rights therein or for the extinguishment or modification of any such rights shall be deemed to be void on the ground that it is inconsistent with, or takes away or abridges any of the rights conferred by, any provisions of this Part :-* * * *

31B. Validation of certain Acts and Regulations. Without prejudice to the generality of the provisions contained in article :31A, none of the Acts and Regulations specified in the Ninth Schedule nor any of the provisions thereof shall be deemed to be void, or ever to have become void, on the ground that such Act, Regulation or provision is inconsistent with, or takes away or abridges any of the rights conferred by, any provisions of this Part, and notwithstanding any judgment, decree or order of any court or tribunal to the contrary, each of the said Acts and Regulations shall, subject to the power of any competent Legislature to repeal or amend it, continue in force. It will be seen that these articles do not either in terms or in effect seek to make any change in article 226 or in articles 132 and 136. Article 31A aims at saving laws providing for the compulsory acquisition by the State of a certain kind of property from the operation of article 13 read with other relevant articles in Part III, while article 3lB purports to validate certain specified Acts and-Regulations already passed, which, but for such a provision, would be liable to be impugned under article 13. It is not correct to say that the powers of the High Court under article 226 to issue writs "for the enforcement of any of the rights conferred by Part III" or of this Court under articles 132 and 136 to entertain appeals from orders issuing or refusing such writs are in any way affected. They remain just the same as they were before: only a certain class of case has been excluded from the purview of Part II/and the courts could no longer interfere, not because their powers were curtailed in any manner or to any extent, but because there would be no occasion hereafter for the exercise of their power in such cases.

The other objection that it was beyond the power of Parliament to enact the new articles is equally untenable. It was said that they related tO land which was covered by item 18 of List II of the Seventh Schedule and that the State legislatures alone had the power to legislate with respect to that matter. The answer is that, as has been stated, articles a IA and 3lB really seek to save a certain class of laws and certain specified laws already passed from the combined operation of article 13 read with other relevant articles of Part III. The new articles being thus essentially amendments of the Constitution, Parliament alone had the power of enacting them. That the laws thus saved relate to matters covered by List II does not in any way affect the position. It was said that Parliament could not validate a law which it had no power to enact. The proposition holds good where the validity of the impugned provision turns on whether the subject-matter falls within or without the jurisdiction of the legislature which passed it. But to make a law which contravenes the constitution constitutionally valid is a matter of constitutional amendment, and as such it falls within the exclusive power of Parliament. The question whether the latter part of article 31B is too widely expressed was not argued before us and we express no opinion upon it.

The petitions fail and are dismissed with costs. Petitions dismissed.

Agent for the Petitioners in Petitions Nos. 871, 372, 382, 383, 388 and 392: I. N. Shroff.

Agent for the Petitioners in Petitions Nos. 287, 374 to 381 393, 394, 395: Rajinder Narain.

Agent for the Petitioners in Petitions Nos. 387, 418, 481 to 485, 384, 385, 386 and 389: S.S. Sukla. Agent for the Petitioners in Petition No. 166:

M.S.K. Sastri.

Agent for the Petitioners in Petition Nos. 817 and 319: R.S. Narula.

Agent for the Petitioner in Petition No. 318: Ganpat Rai.

Agent for the respondents: P. A. Mehta.

 

 


Annexure-s7

In the matter of FIR 440/96

State V/s Ayodhya Prasad Tripathi

Police Station Roop Nagar Delhi North

THE JUDGEMENT

BIMAL CHANDRA BASAK

May 17          85. 
Chandmal Chopra & Anr. 
Versus 
State of West Bengal

The Court: I have heard and disposed of this application on the 13th of May 1985 when I indicated that I shall give my reasons later.

Facts:

2. This is an application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for a Writ of Mandamus directing the State of West Bengal to declare each copy of the Koran, whether in the original Arabic or in its translation in any of the languages, as forfeited to the Government.

3. This application was first moved before Khastgir J. The learned Judge entertained the application, gave directions for notice and for affidavits.  Thereafter for some reason or other the learned Judge chose not to proceed in this matter any further and released this matter from her list.  Such reason cannot be found out from the records of this case though the learned Judge had chosen to take an unprecedented step by giving an interview to the Press regarding the same of which I cannot and do not take any notice.  The Chief Justice thereafter assigned this matter to me.  As the learned Judge after giving directions has chosen not to hear this matter any further and as this matter has been assigned to me, I have recalled all the earlier orders and/or directions passed and heard the matter afresh as Court Application on the question of issue of the Rule nisi, if any.  Accordingly the petitioner no. I who is appearing in person made submissions and prayed for issue of a Rule.

4. The learned Advocate General has appeared for the State and with the leave of this Court the learned Attorney General has made submissions on behalf of Union of India.

5. The petitioners have, in this petition, quoted some passages from the English translation of Koran and thereafter made the following averments:

The offending expressions contained in the Koran and quoted in paragraphs 4, 5 and 6 above are not so offensive in their translation in which they are so quoted as they are in the original verses in Arabic or in Urdu, the very sound of whose inimitable symphony not only sends the Muslims to tears and ecstasy but arouses in them the worst communal passions and religious fanaticism, which have manifested themselves in murder, slaughter, loot, arson, rape and destruction or desecration of holy places in historical times as also in contemporary period not only in India but almost all over the world. (paragraph 8).

In this way, the publication of the Koran in the original Arabic as well as in its translations in various languages including Urdu, Hindi, Bengali, English, etc., amounts to commission of offences punishable u/s 153A and 295A of the Indian Penal Code and accordingly each copy of the book must be declared as forfeited by the respondent u/s 95 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. (paragraph 9).

Submissions - Petitioner

6. The petitioner in his submission has repeated what has been stated in the petition.  He has submitted that the provisions of Sections 153A and 295A of the Indian Penal Code are attached and accordingly the respondent should be directed to take action under Section 95 of the Criminal Procedure Code.  He has submitted that Koran seeks to destroy idols.  It encourages crime and invites violence.  It is also against morality.  It outrages the religious feelings of non-Muslims.  It insults all religions excepting Islam.  It encourages hatred, disharmony, feelings of enmity between different religious communities in India.

7. The relevant provisions of Section 95 of the Criminal Procedure Code (hereinafter referred to as Cr. P.C.) and Sections 153A, 295 and 295A of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as I.P.C.), are set out hereinbelow:

Cr. P.C. - See. 95: “(1) Where (a) any newspaper, or book (b) any document, wherever printed, appears to the State Government to contain any matter the publication of which is punishable under section 124A or section 153A or section 153B or section 292 or section 293 or section 295A of the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860), the State Government may, by notification, stating the grounds of its opinion, declare every copy of the issue of the newspaper containing such matter, and every copy of such book or other document to be forfeited to Government, and thereupon any police officer may seize the same wherever found in India and any Magistrate may by warrant authorise any police officer not below the rank of sub-inspector to enter upon and search for the same in any premises where any copy of such issue or any such book or other document may be or may be reasonably suspected to be.

(2) In this section and in section 96 

   (a) newspaper and book have the same meaning as in the Press and Registration of Book Act, 1867 (25 of 1867). 

   (b) document includes any painting, drawing or photograph or other visible representation.

(3) No order passed or action taken under this section shall be called in question in any court otherwise than in accordance with the provisions of section 96.”

I.P.C. - Sec. 153A: “Whoever by words, either spoken or written or by visible representations, or otherwise, promotes or attempts to promote feelings of enmity or hatred between different classes of Her Majesty’s subjects, shall be punished with imprisonment which may extend to two years, or with fine or with both.”

I.P.C. - Section 295: “Whoever destroys, damages or defiles any place of worship, or any object held sacred by any class of persons with the intention of thereby insulting the religion of any class of persons or with the knowledge that any class of persons is likely to consider such destruction, damage or defilement as an insult to their religion, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both.”

Section 29SA: “Whoever, with deliberate and malicious intention of outraging the religious feelings of any class of His Majesty’s subjects, by words, either spoken or written, or by visible representations insults or attempts to insult the religion or the religious beliefs of that class, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both.”

8. The petitioner no. 1 has addressed the Court in person and placed the petition and drawn my attention to the relevant provisions of the Act referred to above, and has submitted that it is a fit and proper case where such an order is to be passed against the Government directing them to take action under Section 95 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

Submission - State

9. The learned Advocate General appearing on behalf of the State has placed before me Section 295 of the Indian Penal Code which I have set out above.

10. The learned Advocate General has submitted that the Koran is a sacred book of the Muslim community and making an order of the nature as prayed for would amount to abolition of this religion.  Such a prayer offends the provisions of Section 295 of the I.P.C. and, therefore, the question of invoking jurisdiction of this Court in respect of Section 295A of the I.P.C. cannot and does not arise.  In this connection he has relied on a decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Veerabadram Chettiar – vs - V. Ramaswami Naicker & Ors. reported in A.I.R. 1958 S.C. 1032 at page 1035, paragraph 7. The relevant passage is set out hereinbelow:

“The learned Judge in the court below, has given much too restricted a meaning to the words ‘any object held sacred by any class of persons,’ by holding that only idols in temples or idols carried in processions on festival occasions, are meant to be included within those words.  There are no such express words of limitation in S. 295 of the Indian Penal Code and in our opinion the learned Judge has clearly misdirected himself in importing those words of limitation.  Idols are only illustrative of those words.  A sacred book, like the Bible, or the Koran, or the Granth Saheb, is clearly within the ambit of those general words.  If the courts below were right in their interpretation of the crucial words in S. 295 the burning or otherwise destroying or defiling such sacred books, will not come within the purview of the penal statute.  In our opinion, placing such a restricted interpretation on the words of such general import, is against all established canons of construction.  Any object however trivial or destitute of real value in itself, if regarded as sacred by any class of persons would come within the meaning of the penal section.  Nor is it absolutely necessary that the object, in order to be held sacred should have been actually worshipped.  An object may be held sacred by a class of persons without being worshipped by them.  It is clear, therefore, that the courts below were rather cynical in so lightly brushing aside the religious susceptibilities of that class of persons to which the complainant claims to belong.  The section has been intended to respect the religious susceptibilities of persons of different religious persuasions or creeds.  Courts have got to be very circumspect in such matters, and to pay due regard to the feelings and religious emotions of different classes of persons with different beliefs, irrespective of the consideration whether or not they share those beliefs, or whether they are rational or otherwise, in the opinion of the court.”

Mr. Advocate General has submitted that the Koran has been in existence for a long time.  No grievance has been made at any point of time by any one to the effect as the petitioner is seeking to do before this Court.  He has submitted that this Court is not entitled to go into this matter as this relates to a question of religion itself.  He has further submitted that this is a motivated application with the intention of destroying communal harmony.

He has relied on a decision in the case of Public Prosecutor - vs - P. Ramaswami reported in 1966 (1) C.L.J., 672.

Submission - Union of India.

12. Mr. Attorney General appearing on behalf of Union of India assisted by M.K. Banerjee Additional Solicitor General has adopted the submission of Mr. Advocate General and further added as follows:

He has referred to a passage from the Encyclopaedia Britannica at pages 444 and 445.  He has submitted that the Koran is a basic text.  It is the basis and foundation of the Muslim religion.  This cannot be made justiciable in a court of law.  The challenge of the petitioner amounts to not only an insult to the Muslim religion as such but against all other religions also.  He has further submitted that certain passages taken out of context cannot be referred to for invoking the writ jurisdiction of this Court.  He has also relied on a passage from The Life and Letters of Raja Rammohan Roy written by Collet.

13. He has also relied on a decision in the case of Krishna Singh - vs - Mathura & Ors. reported in A.I.R. 1980 S.C. 707 at page 712 paragraph 17.

14. He has also relied on several passages from Fyzee and Mulla’s 18th Edition on Mohammedan Law.

15. He has also relied on a decision in the case of Ramjilal Modi - vs - State of U.P. reported in A.I.R. 1957 S.C. 620, paragraph 9.

 16. Next.  Mr. Attorney General has drawn my attention to the Preamble of the Constitution of India and Article 25 thereof which are set out hereinbelow:

Preamble :  WE, THE PEOPLE OF INDIA, having solemnly resolved to constitute India into a SOVEREIGN SOCIALIST SECULAR DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC and to secure to all its citizens Liberty of thought, expression, belief, faith and worship.

Art. 25: (1) Subject to public order, morality and health and to the other provisions of this Part, all persons are equally entitled to freedom of conscience and the right freely to profess, practise and propagate religion.

17. He has submitted that in view of such provisions of the Constitution the Court has no such power to give any such direction.

18. He has further relied on a passage from Halsbury’s Laws of England (4th Edition, Vol. 18, paragraphs 1692 and 1693).

19. He has further submitted that this is supposed to be a public interest litigation and this Court should be very cautious about the same.  In this connection he has drawn my attention to the decision of the Supreme Court in Bandhu Mukti Morcha - vs -Union of India and others reported in 1984(3) S.C. 161 at 231 paragraphs 59 to 67.

Reply

20. The petitioner in his reply repeated his submissions.

Decision

21. Before examining the scope of the contention of the petitioners, it is necessary to ascertain the scope and importance of the Koran as such.  It is the basic text of the Muslim religion.  Like all other religions it proceeds on the basis that it is the only true religion and that those who do not follow that religion are not the true devotees of God.

22. As observed by the Supreme Court in the case of S. Veerabadram Chettiar - vs - V. Ramaswami Naicker (supra), as followed in the Madras decision of Public Prosecutor vs.  Ramaswami (supra) the Koran, like the Bible and the Granth Saheb is a sacred book.  It is an object held sacred by Muslims.  Allah is considered as the God.

23. As pointed out in the Encyclopaedia Britannica, the Koran is the sacred scripture of the religion of Islam.  It is a book in the Arabic language containing about 80,000 words.  It is composed of 114 suras, or chapters, of varying size.  The first sura, entitled “The Opening”, is in the form of a short devotional prayer; it is constantly so used, ceremonially and otherwise, and by comparativists has been called “the Lord’s Prayer of the Muslims”.  It is addressed to God.  The remainder of the Koran is in the form of an address from God, he either speaking himself, sometimes in the first person, or else, through the imperative ul, “say” which introduces many verses and passages and some suras, ordering that the words that follow be proclaimed.  The subject matter is varied; passages of one or several verses, or of an entire sura, deal in diverse ways with many topics.  It speaks about oneness and omniscience and supreme majesty of God.  The style at time fiery, is powerful, the general tone deeply moralist and theocentric; the whole reverberates with a passionate demand for obedience to the will of a transcendent but near and mightily active God.

24. In the faith of Muslims, and according to the theory propounded in the book itself, the Koran is the revealed word of God.  This postulates God, and indeed the kind of God who has something to say to us and who takes the initiative in saying it.  Religion in this view is not a human searching after God; it is God who acts, and is known because and insofar as, and only as, he chooses to disclose himself.

25. In the Muslim view, God created the universe, ordaining its processes and controlling them.  He prescribed a pattern or order, which nature must obey.  For man also he obtained a pattern of behaviour, but unlike the rest of the natural world, man was made conscious and free, to choose whether or not he will conform to God’s decrees.  There is for mankind a right way to live; it is the Koran that seeks to make this known.

26. For Muslims the Koran is the ipsissima verba of God himself.  It is God speaking to man not merely in 7th century Arabia to Mohammed but from all eternity to every man throughout the world including the individual Muslim as he reads it or devoutly holds it.  It is eternal breaking through into time, the unknowable disclosed, the transcendent entering history and remaining here, available to mortals to handle and to appropriate, the divine become apparent.  To memorise it, as many Muslims have ceremonially done, and perhaps even to quote from it, as every Muslim does daily in his formal prayers and otherwise, is to enter into some sort of communion with ultimate reality.

27. There is another aspect of this matter.  There are various interpretations of different verses of the Koran.  As pointed out by S.D. Collet in The Life and Letters of Raja Rammohan Roy two verses of the Koran quoted by Raja Rammohan Roy are interpreted differently by some modem scholars.  So far as verse of the Koran under IX.5. is concerned according to a scholar, it does not refer to general massacre of all polytheists and idolaters, that is all non-Muslims, but it speaks only of those non-Muslims who were waging war at the time with the Muslims treacherously by breaking previous agreement.

28. According to the Mulla on Mohammedan Law there are four sources of Islamic Law, one of which is the ‘Koran’.  The word ‘Islam’ means peace and submission.  In its religious sense it denotes submission to the will of God and in its secular sense the establishment of peace.  The word ‘Muslim’ in Arabic is the active participle of ‘As-salam’ which is acceptance of the faith and of which the noun of action is ‘Islam’.  In English the word ‘Muslim’ is used both as a Noun and an Adjective and denotes both the persons professing faith and something peculiar to Muslims, such as law, culture, etc.  The Muslims believe in the divine origin of their holy book which according to their belief was revealed to the prophet by the angel Gabriel.  The ‘Koran’ is Al-furcan, i.e., one showing truth from falsehood and right from wrong.  The Koran contains about 6000 verses but not more than 200 verses deal with legal principles.  The portion which was revealed to the prophet at Mecca is, singularly free of legal matter and contains the philosophy of life and religion and particularly ‘Islam’.  As the Koran is of divine origin, so are the religion and its tenets and the philosophy and the legal principles which the Koran inculcates.  The Koran has no earthly source.  It was compiled from memory after the prophet’s death from the version of Osman the third Caliph.

29. It is in the light of the above that one should approach to examine the said book.  Some passages containing interpretation of some chapters of the Koran quoted out of context cannot be allowed to dominate or influence the main aim and object of this book.  It is dangerous for any court to pass its judgement on such a book by merely looking at certain passages out of context.

30. In my opinion the Koran being a sacred Book and “an object held sacred by a class of persons” within meaning of Section 295 of Indian Penal Code, against such book no action can be taken under Section 295A.  Section 295A is not attracted in such a case.  Section 295A has no application in respect of a sacred book which is protected under Section 295 of I.P.C. Any other interpretation would lead to absurdity.  If any offence, within the meaning of Section 295 is committed, in respect of Koran then it is punishable.  Such Book gets protection in view of Section 295A.  At the same time if it is open to take any such action under Section 295A against such Book, then the protection given under Section 295 will become nugatory and meaningless.

31. Further, as pointed out by the Supreme Court in the case of Ramji Lal Modi - vs - State of U. P. (supra) Section 295A does not penalise any and every act of insult or attempt to insult the religion or the religious beliefs of a class of citizens, which are not perpetrated with the deliberate and malicious intention of outraging the religious feelings of that class.  Insults to religion offered unwittingly or carelessly or without any deliberate or malicious intention of outraging the religious feelings of that class do not come within the scope of the section.  It only punishes the aggravated form of insult to religion when it is perpetrated with deliberate and malicious intention of outraging the religious feelings of that class.  I have set out the aim and object of the Koran.  In my opinion it cannot be said that Koran offers any insult to any other religion.  It does not reflect any deliberate or malicious intention of outraging the religious feelings of non-Muslims.  Isolated passages picked out from here and there and read out of context cannot change the position.

32. The Attorney General is right in his contention that such a construction as suggested cannot be given as this would amount to violation of the Constitution. I have already set out the Preamble to and Article 25 of the Constitution.

33. Preamble to the Constitution is a part of the Constitution. Keshavananda - vs - Kerala, A.I.R. 1973 S.C. 1461.  Accordingly, it is open to the Court to keep the same in mind while considering any provision of the Constitution of India.

34. In my opinion passing of such order as prayed for would go against the Preamble of the Constitution and would violate the provisions of Article 25 thereof.  The Preamble proclaims India to be a secular State.  It means that each and every religion is to be treated equally.  No preference is to be given to any particular religion.  No religion is to be belittled.  Liberty of thought, expression, belief, faith and worship are assured.  Koran, which is the basic text book of Mohammedans, occupies a unique position to the believers of that faith as Bible is to the Christians and Gita, Ramayana and Mahabharata to the Hindus.  In my opinion, if such an order is passed, it would take away the secularity of India and it would deprive a section of people of their right of thought, expression, belief, faith and worship.  This would also amount to infringement of Article 25 which provides that all persons shall be equally entitled to freedom of conscience and the right freely to profess, practise and to propagate religion.  Banning or forfeiture of Koran would infringe that right.  Such action would amount to abolition of the Muslim religion itself.  Muslim religion cannot exist without Koran.  The proposed action would take away the freedom of conscience of the people of that faith and their right to profess, practise and propagate the said religion.  Such action is unthinkable.  The Court cannot sit in judgment on a holy book like Koran, Bible, Geeta and Granth Saheb.

35. As pointed out in Halsbury 4th Ed.  Vol. 18 on “Foreign Relations Law”, right of freedom of thought, conscience and religion includes freedom, alone or with or in community with others, and in public or private, to manifest religion or belief in worship, teaching, practice and observance.  In my opinion, the action proposed will deprive a class of persons of their human rights.

36. There is another aspect of the matter.  This sacred book has been in existence for a number of years with its different interpretations and translations.  Upto now no one has chosen to challenge the same.

37. For similar reasons I also hold that Section 153A of the Indian Penal Code has no application in the facts of the present case.  Apart from anything else, there is no question of forfeiture or banning of the said book on the grounds of disharmony or feelings of enmity or hatred or ill-will between different religions or communities.  This book is not prejudicial to the maintenance of harmony between different religions.  Because of the Koran no public tranquility has been disturbed upto now and there is no reason to apprehend any likehood of such disturbance in future.  On the other hand the action of the petitioners may be said to have attempted to promote, on the grounds of religion, disharmony or feelings of enmity, hatred or ill-will between different religions, i.e., between Muslims on the one hand and non-Muslims on the other within the meaning of Section 153A.  Similarly, in my opinion, it may be said that by this petition the petitioners insult or attempt to insult the Muslim religion and the religious belief of the Muslims within the meaning of Section 295A of the Indian Penal Code.  It is an affront to Islam’s Supreme Scriptural Authority.  For this reason the contention of the respondents that this application is motivated cannot be completely ruled out.

38. The learned Attorney General was right in making comments regarding caution to be exercised in entertaining public interest litigation.  A Writ petition is a very important proceeding.  It is known as a High Prerogative Writ.  Article 226 of the Constitution confers a wide power on the High Courts.  It is wider than Article 32 itself.  The High Court enjoys a jurisdiction which is not enjoyed by an ordinary civil court.  In many cases where no remedy is available in an ordinary civil court, the Writ Court is the only forum.  It is much more expeditious than an ordinary civil proceeding.  However, in my opinion it is the duty of the Court while entertaining or admitting such application, particularly a public interest litigation, to be very cautious about the same, particularly where it is a matter of great public interest.  In this context reference may be made to the judgment of Pathak J. in the case of Bandhu Mukti Morcha - vs - Union of India (supra).  The present case involves the sentiment and religious feelings of a minority community.  The matter involves religious feelings of millions of people not only in India but also outside India.  It involves a highly delicate and sensitive issue.  The application was entertained and admitted without going into the question of prima facie case and the jurisdiction and power of the Court to entertain this petition.  In spite of the same directions were given for filing of affidavits.  This by itself amounts to holding that there is a prima facie case though this question was not gone into.  The Court should be circumspect in such kind of matters and be very cautious about the same.  Otherwise though it might attract cheap publicity but may cause untold misery and disruption of religious harmony.  The High Court should have been spared of the embarrassment caused.  The petition should have been rejected forthwith and in limine as unworthy of its consideration as soon as it was moved.

39. For the aforesaid reasons I am of the opinion that the Writ Court’s jurisdiction has been wrongly sought to be invoked in this case.  No prima facie case has been made out.  It is clear that this Court has no power of jurisdiction to pass any such order as prayed for in this application.

40. For the aforesaid reasons this applications stands dismissed.  No order as to costs.

41. In this connection I record my appreciation of the very frank, fair and sober manner in which this case has been argued by the Attorney General appearing for the Union of India and the Advocate General appearing for the State.

Sd/- 
(B.C. Basak)


 


Annexure-s8

In the matter of FIR 440/96

State V/s Ayodhya Prasad Tripathi

Police Station Roop Nagar Delhi North

Why allow Azaan?

 

You are here,

 

Christianity and Islam have been fabricated to enslave else kill a human being.

 

Leaders, reformers, saints, Media, Islamic and Missionary politicos and clerics are purposely deceiving humanity. The truth is not hidden, nor is it hard to find. Media is scared, clueless, and willfully ignorant at the cost of human eradication. Good Muslims and Christians would continue to wage Jihad and Mission until we stop them by eliminating their means and motivation. Means is petro dollars and Missionary funds and motivation is Koran and Bible. (Koran 8:39) and (Bible, Luke 19:27).

 

Secular Allah's good Muslim becomes Jihadist i.e. crusader of Islam, a man who leaves his home, sacrificing his wealth and life, fighting in Allah’s Cause. (Koran, 8:72). That cause is destroying all faiths save Islam. (Koran 8:39). Allah says they (Muslims) will be rewarded with stolen booty (Koran, 8:1, 69 and 41) and women to rape (Koran, 23:6) of the victims, if they survive or with a heavenly BROTHEL (Koran, 37:47-49 and 76:19-21) if they die. Bad Muslims, on the other hand, are peaceful. Allah calls them “hypocrites”, because they are unwilling to fight. (Koran, 3:167). He even says that peaceful Muslims are “the vilest of creatures” and that hell’s hottest fires await them. [Koran 16:70] If you are a peace-loving Muslim, may note, your Allah hates you. Muslims have no shame that they submit to dreaded incest monger, (Koran 33:37-38) assassin and robber Allah. (Koran, 8:1 and 17). Good Muslims are those, who relinquished liberty in lieu of booty and sex. Look! This is secularism. Democrats say, "This is peaceful coexistence and religious tolerance!"

 

Let us examine, what (Imaams) literally shout from their mosques,

 

 Allahu Akbar Allah is the greatest

 

Allahu Akbar Allah is the greatest

 

Ash hadu an la ilaha illal lah I bear witness that there is no deity but Allah.

 

Ash hadu an la ilaha illal Lah I bear witness that there is no deity but Allah.

 

Ash hadu an-na Muhammadar rasulul lah I bear witness that Muhammad(saw) is the messenger of Allah.

 

Ash hadu Anna Muhammadar rasulul lah I bear witness that Muhammad(saw) is the messenger of Allah.

 

Hayya 'alas salah Come to payer

 

Hayya 'alas salah Come to Prayer.

 

Hayya 'alal falah Come to your Good

 

liayya 'alal falah Come to your Good.

 

Allahu Akbar Allah is the greatest

 

Allahu Akbar Allah is the greatest

 

La ilaha illal Lah There is no deity but Allah.

 

Now sooth sayers may explain,

 

If 'There is no deity but Allah.' My Ishwar is false. I have no right to pray my Ishwar.

 

As such where is my freedom of faith guaranteed by the Indian Constitution and 'Universal

 

Declaration of Human Rights' of UNO?

 

 Allah, through his Koran commands, 'Fight them until persecution is no more and the Religion of

 

 Allah reigns supreme.' (Koran 8:39)

 

1.     That Muslims' Allah and his Islam have divided humanity between Momins and Kafirs and territories between Dar-Ul-Herb and Dar-Ul-Islam. Slay or convert Kafirs into Momins and convert Dar-Ul-Herb into Dar-Ul-Islam is Jihad. (Koran 8:39). Jihad is divine command and sure path to either secure heavenly brothel or honour of Ghazi with ownership of Kafirs' land, women and properties.

 

2.     That I am quoting Fallaci, a renowned journalist from her book, "In 1974 [Algerian President] Boumedienne, the man who ousted Ben Bella three years after Algerian independence(?), spoke before the General Assembly of the UN. And without circumlocutions he said: ‘One day millions of men will leave the southern hemisphere of this planet to burst into the northern one. But not as friends. Because they will burst in to conquer, and they will conquer by populating it with their children. Victory will come to us from the wombs of our [(looted and raped) (Koran 23:6)] women.’ "

 

3.     That the Islamic prime Minister of Turkey Erdogan clearly and loudly said “The Mosques are (not worship places) our barracks, the Domes are helmets, the Minarets are Bayonets and the faithful are soldiers.” Erdogan’s vision of Islam is the same as that of Bin-Laden, Colonel Khadafy, Mullah Omar, Imam Yavalaki, Al-Zwahiri, Ayatollah Khomeini and the Saudi King who awarded the Islamic Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan “The King Faisal International prize for service to Islam.”

 

4.     That reading Allah’s orders out of the Koran’s 8th surah, from the pulpits of their mosques Imaams preach: “O Prophet, urge the faithful to fight. If there are twenty among you with determination they will vanquish two hundred; if there are a hundred then they will kill a thousand Infidels, for they are a people devoid of understanding.” That is the math of terror. It is being made possible because infidels are ignorant of Islam. In addition, note how, the Koran defines “Infidels”. “They are surely Infidels who say Christ, the Messiah is God.” (5:72)

 

5.     That read how Allah recruits suicide bombers: “Those who barter their life in this world for the next should fight in the way of Allah; whether he is killed or victorious, a glorious reward awaits.” “Urge the believers to fight…to keep back the might of the Infidels.” “Seize them and kill them wherever they are.” “Muslims who sit idle are not equal to those who fight in Allah’s Cause with their wealth and lives. Allah has exalted those, who fight for Islam.”

 

http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/Quran/023-violence.htm

 

http://www.cmje.org/religious-texts/quran/verses/002-qmt.php#002.191

 

6.     That read the words of the Saudi ruling family’s favorite Imaam, al Buraik. He is licensed Imaam, He’s atop the social hierarchy. Prior to a telethon hosted to enrich the families of Palestinian suicide bombers, this esteemed cleric said, “I am against America. She is the root of all evils and wickedness on earth. Muslims, don’t take Jews and Christians as allies. Muslim brothers in Palestine, do not have any mercy or compassion on them, their blood, their money, or their flesh. Their women are yours to take, legitimately. Allah made them yours. Why don’t you enslave their women? Why don’t you wage jihad? Why don’t you pillage (plunder) them?”

 

7.     That do you suppose the licensed Saudi cleric was corrupting Islam too? Sorry. It’s Allah who commands Muslims not to befriend Christians and Jews, for he wants them killed so he can use their bodies to stoke hell’s fires. “O believers, do not hold Jews and Christians as your allies. They are allies of one another; and anyone who makes them his friends is one of them.” Koran 5:51. “As for those who deny Islam...they shall be the faggots for the Fire of Hell.” Koran 2:10. “Allah said, ‘A prophet must slaughter before collecting captives. A slaughtered enemy is driven from the land. Muhammad, you craved the desires of this world, its goods and the ransom captives would bring. But Allah desires killing them to manifest the religion.’” Koran 8:67. Therefore, Saudi Imaam has correctly interpreted Islam’s message. “Allah made the Jews leave their homes by terrorizing them so that you killed some and made many captive. And He made you inherit their lands, their homes, and their wealth. He gave you a country you had not traversed before.” Koran 33:26

 

8.     That does the reader know? The Islamic warlords, who rule Saudi Arabia were enthroned by the British, by way of reward. The Britons bribed them to fight against their Muslim brethren, the Ottoman Turks, in the World War I.

 

9. Pakistani radical Muslim theorist Syed Abul Ala Maududi declared that "Islam requires the earth - not just a portion, but the whole planet - not because the sovereignty over the earth should be wrested from one Nation or several Nations and vested in one particular Nation, but because the entire mankind should benefit ... from 'Islam' which is the programme of well-being for all humanity.

 

10. Maududi insisted that Kafirs, although free to practice their “false, man-made way,” have “absolutely no right to seize the reins of power in any part of God’s earth nor to direct the collective affairs of human beings according to their own misconceived doctrines.” If they do, “the believers would be under an obligation to do their utmost to dislodge them from political power and to make them live in subservience to the Islamic way of life.”

 

11.     That there is nothing peaceful about Islam. Islam’s dogma breeds ruthless killers. At her direction, Muslims will continue to terrorize the world until non-Muslims (Kafirs) are no more.

 

Koran 61:4 “Surely Allah loves those who fight in His Cause.” Ishaq:300 “I am fighting in Allah’s service. This is piety and a good deed. In Allah’s war I do not fear as others should. For this fighting is righteous, true, and good.”

 

 “When you clash with the unbelieving Infidels in battle (fighting Jihad in Allah’s Cause), smite their necks until you overpower them, killing and wounding many of them. At length, when you have thoroughly subdued them, bind them firmly, making (them) captives. Thereafter either generosity or ransom (based upon what benefits Islam) until the war lays down its burdens. Thus are you commanded by Allah to continue carrying out Jihad against the unbelieving infidels until they submit to Islam.” Koran 47:4

 

   The reader may forget me and think as to how would the reader protect his/her own dignity, life and property?

 

http://www.aryavrt.com/Home/aseemananda/yes-we-are-bombing-mosques

 

That to proselytize is grievous sin and attracts death penalty in Christianity and Islam both. Below are the extracts from Bible and Koran.

 

http://aaryavrt.blogspot.com/2009/12/conversion-christianity-and-islam.html

 

Conversion, Christianity and Islam

 

Would Sonia, the super PM of India, for the commands of Jehovah, let me know as to why missionaries of India, engaged in conversion, are not killed?

 

(Bible, Deuteronomy 13:6-11)

 

“6 If thy brother, the son of thy mother, or thy son, or thy daughter, or the wife of thy bosom, or thy friend, which [is] as thine own soul, entice thee secretly, saying, Let us go and serve other gods, which thou hast not known, thou, nor thy fathers;

 

“7 [Namely], of the gods of the people which [are] round about you, nigh unto thee, or far off from thee, from the [one] end of the earth even unto the [other] end of the earth;

 

“8 Thou shalt not consent unto him, nor hearken unto him; neither shall thine eye pity him, neither shalt thou spare, neither shalt thou conceal him:

 

“9 But thou shalt surely kill him; thine hand shall be first upon him to put him to death, and afterwards the hand of all the people.

 

“10 And thou shalt stone him with stones, that he die; because he hath sought to thrust thee away from the LORD thy God, which brought thee out of the land of Egypt, from the house of bondage.

 

“11 And all Israel shall hear, and fear, and shall do no more any such wickedness as this is among you.”

 

May Hamid Ansari, the Vice-President let me as to why should we not seize Muslims and kill them wherever we find them?

 

Extracted from Koran,

 

Koran 4:89 “They wish that you would reject Faith, as they have, and thus be on the same footing: Do not be friends with them until they leave their homes in Allah’s Cause. But [and this is a hell of a but...] if they turn back from Islam, becoming renegades/apostates, seize them and kill them wherever you find them.”

 

Prior to 3263 years there was no Jew. Earlier than 2012 AD, there was no Christian and earlier than 1433 AD, there was no Muslim. They were converted under persecution in spite of the commands of their scripture to slay the proselyte Christians and Muslims. (Bible, Deut. 13:6-11) and (Koran 4:89). Why should Hindus not kill the Christians and Muslims?

 

Our ancestors failed us. They did not utilize the dogmas of our enemies and slay Christians and Muslims. We seek your support to slay these people for relinquishing their faiths as per their own dogmas?

 

Says Tulsi’s Ram Charit Manas,

 

अनुज बधू भगिनी सुत नारी| सुनु सठ कन्या सम ए चारी|

 

इन्हहिं कुदृष्टि बिलोकइ जोई| ताहि बधें कछु पाप न होई||”

 

राम चरित मानस, किष्किन्धाकाण्ड; ;

 

That Islam permits Muslims to marry daughter in law (Koran 33:37-38) and rape any non-Muslim woman (Koran 23:6). Jesus supports marriage of a Christian with one’s own daughter. (Bible, 1 Corinthians 7:36). Our scriptures allow slaughter for incest. As such we Vedic Panthies have religious right to kill every Christian and Muslim.

 

9.     That the perpetrators of Islamic terror and Christianity's Mission are inflamed with violent and racist doctrines, which are, 'Fight them until persecution is no more and the Religion of Allah reigns supreme.' (Koran 8:39) and “But those enemies of mine who did not want me to be king over them bring them here and kill them in front of me.” Bible, Luke, Chapter 19 Verse 27. Both have agenda, and Hindus are ignorant of it. They have been created to reduce human beings into dinosaurs. Why should we allow such Indian Constitution survive, which has provided unfettered fundamental right to Muslims and Christians to slay us as per Article 29(1) of the Indian Constitution.

 

10.         Rulers, Judges, Governors, Leaders, reformers, saints, Media, Islamic and Missionary politicos and clerics are purposely deceiving humanity. The truth is not hidden, nor is it hard to find. Media is scared, clueless, and willfully ignorant at the cost of human eradication. Good Muslims and Christians would continue to wage Jihad and Mission until we stop them by eliminating their means and motivation. Means is petro dollars and Missionary funds and motivation is Koran and Bible. (Koran 8:39) and (Bible, Luke 19:27). If we don’t retaliate, they would keep on killing Humanity. Non-violence is imposed upon Aryans only through [Article 29(1) of the Indian Constitution] and Sections 196 and 197 of the Criminal Procedure Code.

 

11.         Christianity and Islam are cults invented to enslave humanity. It is time to wake up and fight against these cults, as they are threat to humankind and there can be no co-existence with Muslims and Christians. As long as Muslims and Christians believe in Muhammad and Jesus, they are a threat to others and even to themselves. It is time to wake up and fight against these cults, as they are threat to humankind and there can be no co-existence with Muslims and Christians.

 

12.          The LG, Government of NCT at Delhi, fails to apprehend the danger of survival of Vedic Sanaatan  Dharm and India posed by criminal cultures of Christianity and Islam. However, she was quick to apprehend the incitement of communal hatred in my pamphlet ‘KIRAYA KANOON’

 

13. That Muslims have constructed mosque in Subhash Park, opposite Red Fort, Delhi on the plea that there was Masjid Aqbrabadi before 1857 A.D. Delhi High Court has asked for inquiry with ASI. Well, there is already a board from ASI, in the vicinity of Qutub Minar (Vishnu Dhwaj), Mehrauli, Delhi, stating that the Masjid was constructed from the debris of 27 temples. I demand that the Masjid be replaced with our 27 temples. Nay! Even the Qaba of Muslims is our Jyotirling. I have filed a petition in the court of International justice the details can be had on the URL below,

 

http://aaryavrt.blogspot.in/2007/08/repatriation-of-qaba.html

 

Pray! Write me, where is peaceful co-existence, tolerance, Secularism and Multiculturalism in Islam?

 

I would like to ask National Commission for Minorities’ Chairman Wajahat Habibullah, to send me a copy of notice of minutes sothat I can also proceed with inflammatory statement recited everyday by Muslims. Azaan incites communal hatred among human races.

 

If judiciary allows Muslims to sue Mr. Subramanium; I will loose my faith with the same judiciary which had dismissed my petition  no. 15/1993 of Koran and Azaan. (for details plz click the links below…….)

 

http://aaryavrt.blogspot.com/2007/04/judgment-of-pci.html

 

http://aaryavrt.blogspot.com/2007/04/judgment-on-azaan.html

 

Now time has come, when you yourself have to decide to believe this judiciary, media, and government to commit suicide or

 

raise your voice against Islam?????

Ayodhya Prasad Tripathi (Press Secretary)

Aryavrt Government,

77 Khera Khurd, Delhi -82

Dated; Friday, July 29, 2011

 Ph: (+91)9152579041

 

Annexure-s8

In the matter of FIR 440/96

State V/s Ayodhya Prasad Tripathi

Police Station Roop Nagar Delhi North

 

TUESDAY, AUGUST 14, 2007

 

Repatriation of Qaba

IN THE INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE, HAGUE

CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS AGAINST SAUDI ARABIA GOVERNMENT FOR ILLEGAL OCCUPATION UPON ARYANS' TEMPLE, 'KAMESHWAR MAHADEV JYOTIRLING'

COMPLAINT NO. OF 2007

IN THE MATTER OF,

Wrongful dispossession of Aryans from their Jyotirling,

IN THE MATTER OF,

GOVERNMENT OF ARYAVRT THROUGH ITS PRESS SECRETATY, AYODHYA PRASAD TRIPATHI, S/O LATE SHRI BENI MADHAV TRIPATHI, AGED 73 YEARS, R/O 77, KHERA KHURD, DELHI - 11OO82 (INDIA THAT IS BHARAT) ... COMPLAINANT.

VERSUS

KING Abdullah bin Abdul Aziz Al Saud, S/O King Fahd Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, Riyadh,... RESPONDENT

To,

HON'BLE THE PRESIDENT & OTHER JUSTICES OF THE INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE,

The complainant, aforesaid, submits as here under,

1. That His Majesty KING Abdullah bin Abdul Aziz Al Saud is custodian of Qaba Mosque situated in Mecca of his country Saudi Arabia. The Holy Koran published under his guidance, writes, in reference to commands of Allah compiled in Koran, "Truth has (now) arrived, and falsehood perished: For Falsehood is (by its nature) bound to perish." The Koran, 17th Chapter Bani Israil 17:81.Surah 17 Ayet 81, Also Koran Surah Al Anbiyaa 21 Ayet 51-70.

2. That by his own admission Aryans' worship temple has forcibly been occupied illegally by Muhammed and is in constant illegal possession of KING Abdullah bin Abdul Aziz Al Saud. 359 idols in its vicinity were demolished by Ali.

3. That worship place of Aryans is in protracted abuse in violation of the PREAMBLE of the UNO that has been established,

" to reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person, in the equal rights of men and women and of nations large and small, and

" to establish conditions under which justice and respect for the obligations arising from treaties and other sources of international law can be maintained ..."

4. That it would be in the interest of peace, justice, equal rights of nations and faiths that KING Abdullah bin Abdul Aziz Al Saud may be directed to return Aryans' worship place after re-installing those 359 idols, which were demolished by Ali about 1400 years back.

5. That there is yet another evidence of Qaba being Aryans' place of worship as under,

Arabic Vedic roots

6. A recent archeological find in Kuwait unearthed a gold-plated statue of the Hindu deity Ganesh. A Muslim resident of Kuwait requested historical research material that can help explain the connection between Hindu civilisation and Arabia.Glancing through some research material recently, I was pleasantly surprised to come across a reference to a king Vikramaditya inscription found in the Kaaba in Mecca proving beyond doubt that the Arabian Peninsula formed a part of his Indian Empire.

The text of the crucial Vikramaditya inscription, found inscribed on a gold dish hung inside the Kaaba shrine in Mecca, is found recorded on page 315 of a volume known as 'Sayar-ul-Okul' treasured in the Makhtab-e-Sultania library in Istanbul, Turkey.

Rendered in free English the inscription says:

"Fortunate are those who were born (and lived) during king Vikram's reign. He was a noble, generous dutiful ruler, devoted to the welfare of his subjects. But at that time we Arabs, oblivious of God, were lost in sensual pleasures. Plotting and torture were rampant. The darkness of ignorance had enveloped our country. Like the lamb struggling for her life in the cruel paws of a wolf we Arabs were caught up in ignorance. The entire country was enveloped in a darkness so intense as on a new moon night. But the present dawn and pleasant sunshine of education is the result of the favour of the noble king Vikramaditya whose benevolent supervision did not lose sight of us - foreigners as we were. He spread his sacred religion amongst us and sent scholars whose brilliance shone like that of the sun from his country to ours. These scholars and preceptors through whose benevolence we were once again made cognisant of the presence of God, introduced to His sacred existence and put on the road of Truth, had come to our country to preach their religion and impart education at king Vikramaditya's behest."

For those who would like to read the Arabic wording I reproduce it hereunder in Roman script:

"Itrashaphai Santu Ibikramatul Phahalameen Karimun Yartapheeha Wayosassaru Bihillahaya Samaini Ela Motakabberen Sihillaha Yuhee Quid min howa Yapakhara phajjal asari nahone osirom bayjayhalem. Yundan blabin Kajan blnaya khtoryaha sadunya kanateph netephi bejehalin Atadari bilamasa- rateen phakef tasabuhu kaunnieja majekaralhada walador. As hmiman burukankad toluho watastaru hihila Yakajibaymana balay kulk amarena phaneya jaunabilamary Bikramatum".

(Page 315 - Sayar-ul-okul). [Note: The title 'Saya-ul-okul' signifies memorable words]

A careful analysis of the above inscription enables us to draw the following conclusions:

1. That the ancient Indian empires may have extended up to the eastern boundaries of Arabia until Vikramaditya and that it was he who for the first time conquered Arabia. Because the inscription says that king Vikram who dispelled the darkness of ignorance from Arabia.

2. That, whatever their earlier faith, King Vikrama's preachers had succeeded in spreading the Vedic (based on the Vedas, the Hindu sacred scriptures)) way of life in Arabia.

3. That the knowledge of Indian arts and sciences was imparted by Indians to the Arabs directly by founding schools, academies and cultural centers. The belief, therefore, that visiting Arabs conveyed that knowledge to their own lands through their own indefatigable efforts and scholarship is unfounded.

P R A Y E R

It is, therefore, most humbly & respectfully prayed that our Mecca as well as Jyotirling renamed as Qaba may kindly be directed to be returned to Aryavrt Government.

(Ayodhya Prasad Tripathi)

Government of Aryavrt,

77 Khera Khurd, Delhi-110082; Phone: +91-9868324025

Dated:Monday, July 23, 2007

 

 

 


Annexure-s9

In the matter of FIR 440/96

State V/s Ayodhya Prasad Tripathi

Police Station Roop Nagar Delhi North

 

http://ikashmir.net/templesdestroyed/4.html

 

Temples Destroyed in Kashmir after December 6, 1992

DISTRICT ANANTNAG

Date of occurrence 

Temple 

FIR No. 

Poling Station

8-12-1992 

One of Gouree Shankar Temples 

81/92 

Pahalgam 

10-12-1992 

Two Shiv Jee Temples 

278/92 

Anantnag

8/9-12-1992 

Shiv Jee Temple 

45/92 

Damhal, Honjipora

9-12-1992 

Temple 

45/92 

do

9-12-1992 

Temple 

46/92 

do

7/8-12-1992 

Two Shiva Temples 

165/92 

Kulgam

7/8-12-1992 

Sheevala Temple 

166/92 

Kulgam

8/9-12-1992 

Temples 

168/92 

Kulgam

8/9-12-1992 

Shiva Temples 

169/92 

Kulgam

7/8-12-1992 

Two Temples 

172/92 

Kulgam

7/8-12-1992 

Shivalik Temple 

173/92 

Kulaam

7/8-12-1992 

Shiv Temple 

42/92 

Achabal

7/8-12-1992 

Shiv Temple 

43/92 

Do

7-12-1992 

Temple 

80/92 

Dooru

7-12-1992 

Temple 

81/92 

Dooru

7/8-12-1992 

Temple 

84/92 

Dooru

7/8-12-1992 

Ganesh Temple 

91/92 

Dooru

7/8-12-1992 

Ganesh Temple 

86/92 

Dooru

8-12-1992 

Temple 

93/92 

Dooru

13-12-1992 

Temple 

45/92 

Achabal

16-12-1992 

Temple 

46/92 

Achabal

8-12-1992 

Temple 

93/92 

Dooru

8-12-1992 

Temple 

171 /92 

Kulgam

8/9-12-1992 

Temple 

178/92 

Kulgam

8-12-1992 

Temple 

40/92 

Achabal

7/8-12-1992 

Temple 

167/92 

Kulgam

8-12-1992 

Temple 

47/92 

Hanji pora

7/8-12-1992 

Temple 

163/92 

Kulgam

DISTRICT BARAMULLA

Date of occurrence 

Temple 

FIR No. 

Poling Station

7/8-12-1992 

Temple 

185/92 

Pattan

7/8-12-1992 

Temple 

186/92 

Pattan

8-12-1992 

Two Temples 

78/92 

Panzulla

8-12-1992 

Temple 

178/92 

Sumbal

7-12-1992 

Temple 

188/92 

Oattar

15-12-1992 

Temple 

71/92 

Panzulla

DISTRICT SRINAGAR

Date of occurrence 

Temple 

FIR No. 

Poling Station

18-12-1992 

Temple, Narayan Bagh 

145/92 

Ganderbal 

18-12-1992 

ShamShan Bhoomi, Karan Nagar 

84/92 

Karan Nagar

18-12-1992 

Shiv Vashno Mandir, Bana Mohalla 

265/92 

S.R. Gunj

DISTRICT BUDGAM

Date of occurrence 

Temple 

FIR No. 

Poling Station

7/8-12-1992 

Temple 

38/92 

Chandpora

DISTRICT KUPWARA

Date of occurrence 

Temple 

FIR No. 

Poling Station

10-12-1992 

Temple 

Wati pora

 

 


Annexure-s10

In the matter of FIR 440/96

State V/s Ayodhya Prasad Tripathi

Police Station Roop Nagar Delhi North

 

Supreme Court of India

Prafull Goradia vs Union Of India on 28 January, 2011

Bench: Markandey Katju, Gyan Sudha Misra

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

Writ Petition (civil) No.1 OF 2007

Prafull Goradia Petitioner(s) VERSUS

Union of India Respondent(s) ORDER

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

This Writ Petition under Article 32 of the Constitution had been initially filed challenging the constitutional validity of the Haj Committee Act 1959, but thereafter by an amendment application the Haj Committee Act of 2002 which replaced the 1959 Act, has been challenged.

The ground for challenge is that the said Act is violative of Articles 14, 15, and 27 of the Constitution. The grievance of the petitioner is that he is a Hindu but he has to pay direct and indirect taxes, part of whose proceeds go for the purpose of the Haj pilgrimage, which is only done by Muslims. For the Haj, the Indian Government inter alia grants a subsidy in the air fare of the pilgrims.

Particular emphasis has been given by the petitioner to Article 27 of the Constitution which states:-

"27. Freedom as to payment of taxes for promotion of any particular religion.—No person shall be compelled to pay any taxes, the proceeds of which are specifically appropriated in payment of expenses for the promotion or maintenance of any particular religion or religious denomination."

The petitioner contends that his fundamental right under Article 27 of the Constitution is being violated. We have, therefore, to correctly understand and interpret Article 27.

There are not many decisions which have given an indepth interpretation of Article 27. The decision in Commissioner, Hindu Religious Endowments vs. Sri Lakshmindra Thirtha Swamiar, 1954 (5) SCR 1005 held (vide page 1045) that since the object of the Madras Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1951 is not to foster or preserve the Hindu religion but to see that religious trusts and institutions are properly administered, Article 27 is not attracted. The same view was taken in Jagannath Ramanuj Das vs. State of Orissa and Anr. 1954(5) SCR 1046. The decision in T.M.A. Pae Foundation vs. State of Karnataka, AIR 2003 SC 355 (vide paragraph 85) does not really deal with Article 27 at any depth.

There can be two views about Article 27. One view can be that Article 27 is attracted only when the statute by which the tax is levied specifically states that the proceeds of the tax will be utilized for a particular religion. The other view can be that Article 27 will be attracted even when the statute is a general statute, like the Income Tax Act or the Central Excise Act or the State Sales Tax Acts (which do not specify for what purpose the proceeds will be utilized) provided that a substantial part of such proceeds are in fact utilized for a particular religion. In our opinion Article 27 will be attracted in both these eventualities. This is because Article 27 is a provision in the Constitution, and not an ordinary statute. Principles of interpreting the Constitution are to some extent different from those of interpreting an ordinary statute vide judgment of Hon'ble Sikri, J. in Kesavanand Bharati vs. State of Kerala, 1973 (4) SCC 225 (vide para 15). The object of Article 27 is to maintain secularism, and hence we must construe it from that angle.

As Lord Wright observed in James vs. Commonwealth of Australia, (1936) AC 578, a Constitution is not to be interpreted in a narrow or pedantic manner (followed in re C.P. & Berar Act, AIR 1939 F.C.I.). This is because a Constitution is a constituent or organic statute, vide British Coal Corporation vs. The King, AIR 1935 P.C. 158 and Kesavanand Bharati vs. State of Kerala, 1973 (4) SCC 225 (vide para 506). While a statute must ordinarily be construed as on the day it was enacted, a Constitution cannot be construed in that manner, for it is intended to endure for ages to come, as Chief Justice Marshal of the U.S. Supreme Court observed in McCulloch vs. Maryland, 17 U.S. 316(1819) and by Mr. Justice Holmes in Missourie vs. Holland, 252 U.S. 416(1920). Hence a strict construction cannot be given to it.

In our opinion Article 27 would be violated if a substantial part of the entire income tax collected in India, or a substantial part of the entire central excise or the customs duties or sales tax, or a substantial part of any other tax collected in India, were to be utilized for promotion or maintenance of any particular religion or religious denomination. In other words, suppose 25 per cent of the entire income tax collected in India was utilized for promoting or maintaining any particular religion or religious denomination, that, in our opinion, would be violative of Article 27 of the Constitution. However, the petitioner has not made any averment in his Writ Petition that a substantial part of any tax collected in India is utilized for the purpose of Haj. All that has been said in paragraph 5 (i) and (ii) of the Writ Petition is :- "

(i) That the respondent herein has been imposing and collecting various kinds of direct and indirect taxes from the petitioner and other citizens of the country.

(ii) That a part of the taxes so collected have been utilized for various purposes including

promotion and maintenance of a particular religion and religious institutions."

Thus, it is nowhere mentioned in the Writ Petition as to what percentage of any particular tax has been utilized for the purpose of the Haj pilgrimage. The allegation in para 5(ii) of the Writ Petition is very vague. In our opinion, if only a relatively small part of any tax collected is utilized for providing some conveniences or facilities or concessions to any religious denomination, that would not be violative of Article 27 of the Constitution. It is only when a substantial part of the tax is utilized for any particular religion that Article 27 would be violated. As pointed out in para 8 (iv), (v) and (viii) of the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the Central Government, the State Government incurs some expenditure for the Kumbh Mela, the Central Government incurs expenditure for facilitating Indian citizens to go on pilgrimage to Mansarover, etc. Similarly in para 8 (vii) of the counter affidavit it is mentioned that some State Governments provide facilities to Hindu and Sikh pilgrims to visit Temples and Gurudwaras in Pakistan. These are very small expenditures in proportion to the entire tax collected. Moreover, in para 8(iii) of the counter affidavit the Central Government has stated that it is not averse to the idea of granting support to the pilgrimage conducted by any community.

In our opinion, we must not be too rigid in these matters, and must give some free play to the joints of the State machinery. A balanced view has to be taken here, and we cannot say that even if one paisa of Government money is spent for a particular religion there will be violation of Article 27.

As observed by Mr. Justice Holmes, the celebrated Judge of the U.S. Supreme Court in Bain Peanut Co. vs. Pinson, 282 U.S. 499, 501 (1931) "The interpretation of constitutional principles must not be too literal. We must remember that the machinery of the government would not work if it were not allowed a little play in its joints" (see also Missourie, Kansas and Tennessee Railroad vs. May, 194 U.S. 267 (1904). Hence, in our opinion, there is no violation of Article 27 of the Constitution.

There is also no violation of Articles 14 and 15 because facilities are also given, and expenditures incurred, by the Central and State Governments in India for other religions. Thus there is no discrimination. In Transport & Dock Workers Union vs. Mumbai Port Trust, 2010(12) Scale 217 this Court observed that Article 14 cannot be interpreted in a doctrinaire or dogmatic manner. It is not prudent or pragmatic for the Court to insist on absolute equality when there are diverse situations and contingencies, as in the present case (vide paragraphs 39 and 43). Apart from the above, we have held in Government of Andhra Pradesh vs. P. Laxmi Devi, AIR 2008 SC 1640 that Court should exercise great restraint when deciding the constitutionality of a statute, and every effort should be made to uphold its validity.

Parliament has the legislative competence to enact the Haj Committee Act in view of entry 20 to List 1 of the Seventh Schedule to the Constitution which states : "Pilgrimages to places outside India". Thus there is no force in this petition and it is dismissed. Before parting with this case we would like to mention that India is a country of tremendous diversity, which is due to the fact that it is broadly a country of immigrants (like North America) as explained in detail by us in Kailas & Others vs. State of Maharashtra, JT 2011 (1) 19. As observed in paragraph 32 of the said decision, since India is a country of great diversity, it is absolutely essential if we wish to keep our country united to have tolerance and equal respect for all communities and sects (see also in this connection the decision in Hinsa Virodhak Sangh vs. Mirzapur Moti Kuresh Jamaat, AIR 2008 SC 1892 vide paragraphs 41 to 60). It is due to the wisdom of our founding fathers that we have a Constitution which is secular in character, and which caters to the tremendous diversity in our country.

It may be mentioned that when India became independent in 1947 there were partition riots in many parts of the sub-continent, and a large number of people were killed, injured and displaced. Religious passions were inflamed at that time, and when passions are inflamed it is difficult to keep a cool head. It is the greatness of our founding fathers that under the leadership of Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru they kept a cool head and decided to declare India a secular country instead of a Hindu country. This was a very difficult decision at that time because Pakistan had declared itself an Islamic State and hence there must have been tremendous pressure on Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru and our other leaders to declare a Hindu State. It is their greatness that they resisted this pressure and kept a cool head and rightly declared India to be a secular state.

This is why despite all its tremendous diversity India is still united. In this sub-continent, with all its tremendous diversity (because 92 per cent of the people living in the sub continent are descendants of immigrants) the only policy which can work and provide for stability and progress is secularism and giving equal respect to all communities, sects, denominations, etc.

[Markandey Katju] J

[Gyan Sudha Misra] J

New Delhi; January 28, 2011


Annexure-s11

In the matter of FIR 440/96

State V/s Ayodhya Prasad Tripathi

Police Station Roop Nagar Delhi North

PRSEC/E/2012/10265

Dear valued reader,

I have received the message below from URL http://www.way2sms.com

May peruse and verify yourself.

“Please do not send any kind of religious or Hurtful SMS. Strict Action will be taken by the GOVT if any such SMS being Sent by anyone.”

Azaan broadcasted from the pulpit of mosques are religious as well as hurtful to the faiths and deities of non-Muslims as such I demand strict action by the Government of Sonia.

I am requesting you to browse the URLs below,

http://www.aryavrt.com/abolish-ajaan

http://www.aryavrt.com/azaaneng

As per the status checked on Wednesday, August 22, 2012, the report from the President Secretariat is as hereunder,

http://helpline.rb.nic.in/

Request/Grievance Status

LogOut

 

Registration Number

:

PRSEC/E/2012/10265

Name

:

M/s Ayodhya Prasad Tripathi

Date of Receipt

:

27 Jul 2012

Current Status

:

The petition is transferred

Date of Transfer

:

31 Jul 2012

Ministry/Department

:

Ministry of Home Affairs

Officer's Name

:

Shri. Satpal Chouhan

Designation

:

Joint Secretary (Coord. & PG)

Address

:

Room No. 9,

North Block,

New Delhi

Telephone No.

:

23092392

E Mail

:

jscpg-mha@nic.in

Click here to view the live status of this case

Note: You are requested to further liaise in the matter directly with Joint Secretary (Coord. & PG), Ministry of Home Affairs, Room No. 9,North Block, New Delhi for further information.

 

Live Status of Registration Number 'PRSEC/E/2012/10265'

Registration Number

:

PRSEC/E/2012/10265

Name

:

M/s Ayodhya Prasad Tripathi

Date of Receipt

:

27 Jul 2012

Current Status

:

TAKEN UP WITH SUBORDINATE ORGANISATION

Date of Action

:

09 Aug 2012

Ministry/Department

:

HR Division

Officer's Name

:

Smt Rashmi Goel

Designation

:

Joint Secretary

Address

:

Lok Nayak Bhavan

New Delhi

Telephone No.

:

24633828

 

To,

Shri. Satpal Chouhan

Joint Secretary (Coord. & PG)

Sir,

The telephone no 24633828 of JS Smt Rashmi Goel is not responding to pursue my complaint.

May kindly suggest as to how should I pursue my case?

Apt

 

Below is the copy of complaint.

 

Your Request/Grievance Registration Number is : PRSEC/E/2012/10265

 

President Secretariat, New Delhi - 110004

 

Dated; Friday, July 27, 2012y

 

Web site: http://helpline.rb.nic.in/

 

This is a public document. Anyone can view the status from the web site by typing the above Request/Grievance Registration Number. There is no pass-word.

 

###

 

 

ABOLISH AJAAN

 

In lieu of promoting enmity between Muslims and Kafirs, on grounds of religion, race, etc., and doing acts prejudicial to maintenance of harmony, by propagating Ajaan, which is blasphemy of deities of Kafirs and preaching slaughter of Kafirs from their mosques, which are cognizable and non bail able offences u/s 153A and 295A of the Indian Penal Code, Muslims, instead of prosecution, are getting rewards of Hajj subsidy [Writ Petition (civil) No.1 OF 2007 Prafull Goradia Petitioner(s) VERSUS Union of India Respondent(s)], salaries to Muslim Imaams, (AIR 1993 SUPREME COURT 2086) and immunity under section 196 of the Criminal Procedure Code. However, I am facing protracted trial u/s 153A for trying to exercise my legal right as provided vide sections 102 and 105 of the Indian Penal Code since 1993, under the very section 196 of the Criminal Procedure Code. Your Excellency and Governors are helping Sonia in eradicating Vedic Sanaatan Dhram.

Under section 196, no one can complain against offences committed by any one u/s 153A and 295A of the Indian Penal Code, no police can arrest and no judge can try.

For more information click the URL below,

http://www.aryavrt.com/azaaneng

Your Excellency Dada, would you stop our victimization and abolish Ajaan and remove Masjids from where Imaams preach slaughter of Kafirs?

Ayodhya Prasad Tripathi; Mob (+91)9152579041

 

 

THE BEGINNING

 


IN THE COURT OF HON’BLE RAGHUBIR SINGH ACMM TISHAZARI

INDEX

IN

WRITTEN ARGUMENT IN DEFENSE OF ACCUSED

IN

FIR No. 440/1996 PS ROOP NAGAR, DELHI NORTH

In the matter of:

State V/s Ayodhya Prasad Tripathi

Sl No         Details                                                           Annexure No           Pages

1.    Argument                                                                                                       1-60

2.    Judgment on Private Defense                             Annexure-s1             61-68

3.    Salaries to Imams                                                    Annexure-s2             69-74

4.    Section 197 of Criminal Procedure Code         Annexure-s3             75-79

5.    Consequence of NBW against Bukhari               Annexure-s4             80-81

6.    Priyadarshini Mattoo case                                       Annexure-s5             82-85

7.    Imams above law                                                      Annexure-s5a          86-92

8.    Article 31 omitted                                                     Annexure-s6            93-107

9.    Bible and Koran cannot be questioned                        Annexure-s7            108-113

10.  Abolition of Azaan + Repatriation of Qaba       Annexure-s8            114-132

11.  Temple demolition in Kashmir                            Annexure-s9            133-135

12. Judgment on Hajj subsidy                                    Annexure-s10          136-139

13.  Censor of Social Websites                                  Annexure-s11          140-143

 

 

 (Ayodhya Prasad Tripathi)

Accused in Person

Dated: October 11, 2012

 

Comments