Writ Criminlal No..........of 2017 titled "OM PRAKASH & ANR VS. UNION OF INDIA & ORS" filed on 18.1.2017 Vide Diary No. 2188 before Supreme Court of India With 276 Pages

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA ORIGINAL JURISDICTION

WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) NO. OF 2017

WITH WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) NO.136 OF 2016

WITH WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 90 OF 2016

Petition under Article 32 of the Constitution of India with A Prayer for Quashing of Criminal Proceedings and Enforcement of Fundamental Rights. IN THE MATTER OF: OM PRAKASH & ANR …………..PETITIONER

VERSUS

UNION OF INDIA & ORS ….RESPONDENT

CR.M.P. NO. OF 2017

APPLICATION FOR SEEKING PERMISSION TO APPEAR AND ARGUE AS PETITIONER-IN-PERSON

CR.M.P. NO. OF 2017 APPLICATION FOR SEEKING PERMISSION TO GRANT SPECIAL POWER OF ATTORNEY TO PETITIONER NO.01 TO APPEAR AND ARGUE THE WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) NO. OF 2017 ON

BEHALF OF PETITIONER NO.02 CR.M.P. NO. OF 2017

APPLICATION FOR URGENT MENTIONING OF WRIT PETITION CRIMINAL NO. OF 2017 BEFORE HON’BLE THE CHIEF

JUSTICE OF INDIA’S COURT CR.M.P. NO. OF 2017

APPLICATION FOR LISTING WRIT PETITION CRIMINAL NO. OF 2017 BEFORE THE CONSTITUTION BENCH

CR.M.P. NO. OF 2017 APPLICATION FOR AND ONBEHALF OF THE PETITIONER NO. 01 AND 02 FOR CANCELLATION OF NON-BAILABLE WARRANT

DATED 08.09.2011 PROCESS U/S 83 CR.PC. AND FOR QUASHING OF CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS IN COMPLAINT CASE NO.5591 OF 2013 U/S 498A PENDING BEFORE SDJM COURT

NO.16 CJM DIVISION BEGUSARAI BIHAR

PAPER BOOK (FOR INDEX KINDLY SEE INSIDE) VOL-I (PAGE FROM 01 TO 140)

PETITIONER IN PERSON OM PRAKASH

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA ORIGINAL JURISDICTION


WITH WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) NO.136 OF 2016

WITH WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 90 OF 2016

Petition under Article 32 of the Constitution of India with A Prayer for Quashing of Criminal Proceedings and Enforcement of Fundamental Rights. IN THE MATTER OF: OM PRAKASH & ANR …………..PETITIONER

VERSUS


CR.M.P. NO. OF 2017

APPLICATION FOR SEEKING PERMISSION TO APPEAR AND ARGUE AS PETITIONER-IN-PERSON

CR.M.P. NO. OF 2017 APPLICATION FOR SEEKING PERMISSION TO GRANT SPECIAL POWER OF ATTORNEY TO PETITIONER NO.01 TO APPEAR AND ARGUE THE WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) NO. OF 2017 ON

BEHALF OF PETITIONER NO.02 CR.M.P. NO. OF 2017

APPLICATION FOR URGENT MENTIONING OF WRIT PETITION CRIMINAL NO. OF 2017 BEFORE HON’BLE THE CHIEF

JUSTICE OF INDIA’S COURT CR.M.P. NO. OF 2017

APPLICATION FOR LISTING WRIT PETITION CRIMINAL NO. OF 2017 BEFORE THE CONSTITUTION BENCH

CR.M.P. NO. OF 2017 APPLICATION FOR AND ONBEHALF OF THE PETITIONER NO. 01 AND 02 FOR CANCELLATION OF NON-BAILABLE WARRANT

DATED 08.09.2011 PROCESS U/S 83 CR.PC. AND FOR QUASHING OF CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS IN COMPLAINT CASE NO.5591 OF 2013 U/S 498A PENDING BEFORE SDJM COURT

NO.16 CJM DIVISION BEGUSARAI BIHAR

PAPER BOOK (FOR INDEX KINDLY SEE INSIDE) VOL-II (PAGE FROM 141 TO 276)

PETITIONER IN PERSON OM PRAKASH

FILING INDEX

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

ORIGINAL JURISDICTION

WRIT PETITION CRIMINAL NO. OF 2017

WITH

WRIT PETITION CRIMINAL NO.136 OF 2016

WITH

WRIT PETITON CIVIL NO. 90 OF 2016

IN THE MATTER OF:

OM PRAKASH & ANR ………..PETITIONER

VERSUS


S.N Particulars Copies Court Fees

1. Memo of Appearance 1

2. ID proof-Voter ID for P-1 & P-2 1

3. Listing Performa 1+3

4. Synopsis and list of dates 1+3

5. Notification of defects Order

dated 03.01.2017 by Registrar

Misc. of this Hon’ble Court

1+3

6. W P (Crl) with Affidavit 1+3

7. ANNEXURES P-1 to P-26 1+3

8. Appl. for argue in person 1+3

9. Appl. For Spl. power Attorney 1+3

10. Appl. for Urgent Mentioning 1+3

11. Appl. for Constitution Bench 1+3

12. Appl. For Cancellation of N.B.W 1+3

Petitioner in Person

Filed on: 18.01.2017 Om Prakash

Diary No: 2188 RZF-893, NETAJI SUBUSH

MARG, RAJ NAGAR PART-2

PALAM COLONY, NEW DELHI-

110077, DWARKA SEC-08

MOB: 9968337815




WITH


WITH


IN THE MATTER OF:

OM PRAKASH & ANR ……..PETITIONER

VERSUS


MEMO OF APPEARANCE

To

The Registrar

Supreme Court of India

New Delhi

Sir,

Please enter my appearance Petitioner-in-Person

in the above mentioned matter:

New Delhi

Dated this the day of 2017

Yours faithfully,

(OM PRAKASH )

Petitioner-in-Person

INDEX VOL-I

S.N Particulars Page No.

1. Listing Performa A1-A2

2. Synopsis and list of dates B- P

3. Writ Petition (Criminal) 01-102

along with Affidavit in support.

4. Annexure: P-1 103-105

True Copies of Police complaint

against installation of Public

Toilet without the permission of

petitioner no.02 by Mr. Bihari Lal

Bubna, an elected PRI leader to SP

Katihar by the petitioner dated

03.03.2016

5. Annexure: P-2 106-112

True Copies of photographs of

public toilets with posters having

‘text of public toilet for female’

pasted at the entry gate of the

House of the petitioner no.02 sent

by villagers through Watsup dated

05.03.2016 & 06.03.2016 to the

petitioner no.02

6. Annexure: P-3 113-118

True Copies of translated false

police enquiry report by S.P.

Katihar dated 07.05.2016 to the In

charge, Janta Darbar Cell, Police

Head Quarter Bihar, Patna

7. Annexure: P-4 119-120

A True Copy of online rejoinder

vide online complaint no.

999990303160113 against false

police enquiry report of S.P.


17.05.2016

8. Annexure: P-5 121-123

True Copies of the photographs of

the victims viz. above the knee

amputee, Headmaster, father, Late

Shri Deep Narayan Poddar (1939-

2007) and Oxygen dependent,

mother, Widow Asha Rani Devi,

petitioner no.02 herein in this

petition and wife of Late Shri

Deep Narayan Poddar (1946 to till

date) whose house is being turned

into public toilets w.e.f

28.02.2016 to 05.03.2016 by Mr.

Bihari Lal Bubna, an elected

Panchayati Raj Institution (PRI)

leader with the consent of S.P.

Katihar

9. Annexure: P-6 124-133

A True Copy of Letter-Petition

dated 19.08.2016 to Hon’ble the

Chief Justice of India by the

Petitioner.

10. Annexure: P-7 134-140

A True Copy of RTI reply by Ld. CJM

cum PIO Begusarai dated 27.08.2016

to the petitioner

INDEX-VOL-II

S.N Particulars Page No.

11. Annexure: P-8 141-151

A True Copy of application before

Hon’ble the Chief Justice of India

for mentioning of fresh matter

urgently dated 03.10.2016 along

with Affidavit by the petitioner

through R&I as well as through

Registry.

12. Annexure: P-9 152

A True Copy of filing index of

Urgent Mentioning application

before Hon’ble the Chief Justice of

India’s Court through Mentioning

Officer dated 06.10.2016 by the

petitioner through Caveat clearance

Counter without receipt.


A True Copy of order dated

07.10.2016 passed by this Hon’ble

Court in Writ (Crl.) 136 of 2016.

14. Annexure: P-11 154-171



Chief Justice of India by the

petitioner no.02.

15. Annexure: P-12 172-183

A True Copy of application for

constitution bench along with

Affidavit dated 18.10.2016 vide

diary no. 77878 filed against Writ

Petition (Criminal) 136 of 2016

16. Annexure: P-13 184-185

A True Copy of certified copy of

office report dated 20.10.2016 by

the Registrar, Section X in Writ

(Crl.) 136 of 2016.


A True Copy of final Order under

Challenge dated 21.10.2016 passed

by this Hon’ble Court in Writ


18. Annexure: P-15 187-189

A True Copy of email letter of

prayer by the petitioner for

urgent hearing of Second Appeal

vide diary no. 183722 dated

03.11.2016 via Central Information

Commission (CIC) on the ground of

Life or Personal liberty dated

30.11.2016

19. Annexure: P-16 190-191

A True Copy of Order under

Challenge dated 01.12.2016 passed

by this Hon’ble Court in Review


20. Annexure: P-17 192-194

A True Copy of email reply by

DS(CR) CIC turning down the

petitioner’s prayer for urgent

registration of Second Appeal on

the ground of ‘life or personal

liberty’ dated 02.12.2016

21. Annexure: P-18 195-196

A True Copy of online complaint by

the petitioner against Patna High

Court to CIC under the dropdown

box of ‘life or personal liberty’

to make the provision of section

7(1) applicable

22. Annexure: P-19 197-201

A True Copy of email letter to the

Secretary General of Supreme Court

of India for urgent mentioning of

the matter before Hon’ble the

Chief Justice of India’s court by

the petitioner dated 17.12.2016



Registrar Misc. Section X of this

Hon’ble Court for seeking status

of email dated 17.12.2016 by the

petitioner through email dated

22.12.2016

24. Annexure: P-21 203-204








A True Copy of notification of

defects letter vide diary no.

5356/2016/X dated 03.01.2017

against curative petition

criminal vide diary no. 41026

issued by Registrar Misc. Section

X of this Hon’ble Court.


A True Copy of RTI request vide

JUSTC/R/2017/50023 dated

05.01.2017 in view of section

7(1) of RTI Act 2005 by the

petitioner; physically

transferred by Department of

Justice, Government of India to

the Registrar Admin Supreme Court

of India dated 05.01.2017


A True Copy of reply of

notification of defects letter

against curative petition

criminal vide diary no. 41026 by

the petitioner through email

letter dated 06.01.2017

28. Annexure: P-25 208-213

A True Copy of First Appeal with

Registrar Admin, Supreme Court of

India against online RTI

application vide

JUSTC/R/2017/50023 in view of

section 7(1) of RTI Act 2005 by



A True Copy of filing index

against Curative Petition Criminal

vide diary no. 41026 by the

petitioner dated 12.01.2017

30. Application for seeking

permission to appear and argue

the Writ Petition (Criminal) in

person along with supporting

affidavit. 215-220

31. Application for seeking permission

to grant Special Power of

Attorney to Petitioner No.01 to

appear and argue the Writ

Petition (Criminal) No. 136 of

2016 on behalf of Petitioner

No.02 along with Affidavit 221-

227

32. Application for urgent Mentioning

of Writ Petition Criminal No.

of 2017 before Hon’ble the Chief

Justice of India’s Court along

with Affidavit 228-246

33. Application for listing Writ

Petition Criminal No. of 2017

before the Constitution bench

along with Affidavit. 247-263

34. Application for cancellation of

N.B.W dated 08.09.2011 process u/s

83 Cr.Pc. and quashing of criminal

proceedings u/s 498A along with

Affidavit 264-276

SYNOPSIS AND LIST OF DATES

The present petition under Article 32 of the

Constitution of India is being filed to

enforce the Rights under Article 21 of the

Constitution of India with Writ Petition

Criminal 136 of 2016 and Writ Petition Civil

90 of 2016; whereby an offence of perjury

has been committed by Ld. CJM division

Begusarai Court Bihar and Praveen

Kumar(IDAS) CMD of Indian Drugs and

Pharmaceuticals Ltd, New Delhi; Mentioning

officer and Registrar Misc. of Supreme Court

of India has violated the rules as laid down

in the Handbook of Supreme Court of India,

stopped the petitioner to mention the matter

before Hon’ble the Chief Justice of India’s

court, closed the door of Hon’ble the Chief

Justice of India’s court, suppressed the

record of application dated 03.10.2016 for

urgent mentioning before Hon’ble the Chief

Justice of India’s Court in its office

report, circulated an application for

Constitution bench unregistered; spoiled the

ground of Constitution bench and pushed the

petitioner into curative stage

intentionally; on the other hand two judges

bench of this Hon’ble Court has evaded the

Rule of Law under Order XXXVIII of Supreme

Court Rule 2013 by dismissing the Writ

petition 136 of 2016 with liberty while the

petition raised substantial question of law

as to the interpretation of the Constitution

required and to be decided by a division

court of not less than five judges; closed

the door of this Hon’ble Court for the

petitioner forever; protected and shielded

the bad elements of State Apparatus; and

harassed, offended and victimized the

petitioner no.01 and 02 which would have

far reaching consequences against the

interest of public at large and against

the right of Senior Citizen Woman in

particular and would shake the public

confidence by reason of the association

or closeness of judge with the subject

matter of dispute; establish wrong

precedent of procedural Judicial system,

encourage malfunctioning of the State

Apparatus; weaken the basic fabric of the

institutions; ignore constitutional

priority; which has caused gross

injustice, violated the principle of

natural justice, ignored the principle of

ex debito justitiae and resulted in gross

miscarriage of justice.

The Petitioner is filing the Criminal Writ

petition under the Article 32 of

Constitution of India for quashing of

criminal proceedings and enforcement of his

Rights under Article 21 of the constitution

of India.

23.07.2013 Hon’ble High Court of Delhi pronounced

Judgment in MAT. APPL. 7 of 2012 in

favor of petitioner on the ground of

certified copy of Begusarai Court in

case no.9P of 2010 u/s 12 of domestic

violence Act and after three SLP(C)

no. 9854/2012, SLP(C) no. 9483/2013,

SLP(C) no. 19073/2013 before this

Hon’ble Court.

28.02.2016 House of the petitioner no.02 has been

turned into public Toilet with the

posters having text ‘public toilets

for female’ pasted at the entry gate

of the house w.e.f 28.02.2016 to

05.03.2016 by Mr. Bihari Lal Bubna, an

elected PRI leader with the consent of

S.P. of Katihar without the permission

of the petitioner no.02 which has been

placed on record with Writ (C) 90 of

2016 through interlocutory application

and Annexure P-1 to P-5 with this

petition before this Hon’ble Court.

03.03.2016 Police complaint against installation

of Public Toilet without the

permission of petitioner no.02 by Mr.

Bihari Lal Bubna, an elected PRI

leader to SP Katihar by the petitioner

dated 03.03.2016

05.03.2016 The photographs of public toilet with

posters having ‘text of public toilet

for female’ pasted at the entry gate

of the House of the petitioner no.02

has been sent by the villagers through

Watsup dated 05.03.2016 & 06.03.2016

to the petitioner no.02.

07.05.2016 False police enquiry report submitted

by S.P. Katihar dated 7.05.2016 to the

In-charge, Janta Darbar Cell, Police

Head Quarter Bihar, Patna denying the

very fact of the incident.

17.05.2016 Online rejoinder vide online complaint

no. 999990303160113 against false

police enquiry report of S.P. Katihar

is being submitted by the petitioner

on 17.05.2016.

19.08.2016 Letter-Petition against Ld. CJM Court

Begusarai affecting the administration

of Justice dated 19.08.2016 vide diary

no. 35529 has been rejected by this

Hon’ble Court as it did not cover

under the guideline of PIL; although

the matter in the larger public

interest.

27.08.2016 Chief Judicial Magistrate Cum Public

Information Officer District Court

Begusarai Bihar has furnished false

and frivolous RTI reply dated

27.08.2016 received on 01.09.2016.

30.08.2016 That aggrieved by the false RTI reply

dated 27.08.2016 furnished by the Ld.

CJM Begusarai, petitioner filed Writ

Petition Criminal 136 of 2016 on

30.08.2016 before this Hon’ble Court

for quashing of frivolous criminal

proceedings 498A pending before Ld.

CJM division Begusarai since

07.02.2011 without the knowledge of

petitioner and after the settlement of

the same matter by the Hon’ble High

Court of Delhi in 2013.

03.10.2016 Application before Hon’ble the Chief

Justice of India for mentioning of

fresh matter urgent listing earlier

than the scheduled date and urgent

relief is sought against Writ Petition

Criminal 136 of 2016 has been

submitted through R&I department of

this Hon’ble Court after huge hue and

cry as initially R&I refused to take

this Dak and subsequently filed

through filing counter of Party in

Person as well on the same date.

06.10.2016 That the petitioner applied for

urgent mentioning of the matter


India’s court through Mentioning

officer of this Hon’ble Court on

06.10.2016 without routing through

the registry through Caveat

clearance counter. However,

mentioning officer of this Hon’ble

Court has intentionally listed my

urgent mentioning application

before Court No.06 instead of

Hon’ble the chief Justice of

India’s Court in the evening of

06.10.2016 despite of my strong

protest in Writ Petition Criminal

136 of 2016.

07.10.2016 petitioner submitted before the

Hon’ble bench of Court no.06 that the

mentioning officer has cheated the

petitioner and intentionally listed

the matter for mentioning before this

Hon’ble court. Hence, order dated


Court in Writ Petition Criminal 136

of 2016.

08.10.2016 Aggrieved by the intentional act of

mentioning officer the petitioner

no.02 has submitted Letter-Petition

dated 08.10.2016 before Hon’ble the

Chief Justice of India through email

against rampant atrocities on Senior

Citizen, Oxygen dependent, uneducated,

OBC, voiceless, rural woman in two

states viz. Bihar as well as in Delhi

since 12 years.

13.10.2016 petitioner no.02 has again submitted

Letter-Petition dated 13.10.2016


India through speed post and by hand

against rampant atrocities on Senior

Citizen, Oxygen dependent, uneducated,

OBC, voiceless, rural woman in two

states viz. Bihar as well as in Delhi

since 12 years.

17.10.2016 Petitioner being called on 17.10.2016

by the mentioning officer for fresh

application for urgent mentioning in

Writ Petition Criminal 136 of

2016; however petitioner being

harassed whole day from PRO to

mentioning officer and directly

refused by the mentioning officer as

his role is over now.

18.10.2016 Upon direct refusal by mentioning

officer to allow the petitioner to

mention the matter before Hon’ble the

Chief Justice of India as per the

provisions laid down in the handbook

of Hon’ble Supreme Court of India and

the schedule listing of the matter

fixed by the registry on 21.10.2016;

the petitioner left with no option and

filed an application for listing this

matter before the constitution bench

of seven Judges vide diary no. 77878

dated 18.10.2016 in Writ Petition

Criminal 136 of 2016.

20.10.2016 Office-report against Writ Petition

Criminal 136 of 2016 has neither been

supplied by Registrar, Section X nor

been uploaded at the website of

Hon’ble Apex Court. Petitioner has

applied for the certified copy of the

same on 28.10.2016 with an application

registration no. A1-32350/2016 vide

diary no. PC-732 and received on

08.11.2016.

21.10.2016 Writ Petition Criminal 136 of 2016 is

being dismissed with liberty to

approach Patna High Court. During the

course of hearing on 21.10.2016,

petitioner being directed by the

Hon’ble bench to engage Advocate

although the petitioner has clarified

in writing the strong reason for not

engaging any Advocate or legal Aid in

the petition as well as during the

interaction interview with the

Registrar. Petitioner has not being

heard properly by the Hon’ble bench

and order has been passed with an

error apparent on the face of the

record against the petitioner

violating the principles of Natural

Justice which has resulted in gross


09.11.2016 Aggrieved by the dismissal of Writ

Petition Criminal 136 of 2016,

Petitioner preferred to file review

Petition criminal 825 of 2016 on

09.11.2016.

30.11.2016 As per the direction by this Hon’ble

Court in Writ Petition Criminal 136 of

2016, Petitioner tried to approach

Patna High Court through Second Appeal

vide diary no. 183722 dated 03.11.2016

via Central Information Commission

(CIC) on the ground of Life or

Personal liberty with a prayer for

urgent registration on 30.11.2016 but

failed to approach Patna High Court.

01.12.2016 Review Petition Criminal 825 of 2016 is

also being dismissed upholding its

final order by this Hon’ble Court on

01.12.2016.

02.12.2016 DS, Central Registry, CIC has turned

the request of Petitioner down on the

ground of “no ground of life or

personal liberty at any stage i.e. RTI

application, 1st Appeal or even in 2

nd

Appeal has been made out or claimed by

the petitioner”. However, the content

of the second appeal is self-

explanatory at page no.02 and para no.

6, which reads as “another N.B.W dated

08.09.2011 process u/s 83 Cr.Pc. has

been issued by the same CJM division

against applicant and his Senior

Citizen ailing mother in another

frivolous criminal case no. 5591 of

2013 u/s 498A after the closure of

case no. 9P of 2010 and kept it secret

since then without the knowledge of

applicant to usurp his property in

Bihar”. Moreover, the second appeal

does not have any defined format where

applicant can mention the exact word

of life or personal liberty to make

the provision of section 7(1)

applicable as per the RTI Act 2005.

Nevertheless, Online CIC complaint

format contains this dropdown box of

‘life or personal liberty’ to make the

provision of section 7(1) applicable.

Petitioner has also filed complaint

against Patna High Court to CIC under

the dropdown box of ‘life or personal

liberty’ to make the provision of

section 7(1) applicable.

09.12.2016 petitioner filed Curative Petition

Criminal vide diary no.41026 dated

09.12.2016 before this Hon’ble Court

without a Certificate by Sr. Advocate

WITH the valid reason clarified under

para 15 of the same petition.

17.12.2016 Petitioner approached the Secretary

General of this Hon’ble Court for

urgent mentioning of the matter before

Hon’ble the Chief Justice of India’s

court through email dated 17.12.2016.

22.12.2016 Petitioner approached Registrar Misc.

Section X of this Hon’ble Court

through email dated 22.12.2016 for

“seeking status of email letter dated

17.12.2016 addressed to Secretary

General of SCI and subsequently

received by your office dated

19.12.2016 and how long diary no.

41026 dated 09.12.2016 will remain

under scrutiny stage-reg”.

31.12.2016 petitioner again approached to Secretary

General of this Hon’ble Court for urgent

mentioning of the matter before Hon’ble

the Chief Justice of India’s court

through email dated 31.12.2016.

03.01.2017 Registrar Misc. Section X has notified

defects vide diary no.5356/2016/X dated

03.01.2017 against Curative Petition

Criminal vide diary no. 41026.

05.01.2017 Aggrieved by the notification of defects

letter issued by the Registrar Misc.

Section X, the petitioner filed an

online RTI request vide

JUSTC/R/2017/50023 dated 05.01.2017 in

view of section 7(1) of RTI Act 2005

against this Hon’ble Court; and it has

been physically transferred by,

Department of Justice, Government of

India to the Registrar Admin Supreme

Court of India dated 05.01.2017.

06.01.2017 Petitioner replied back the notification

of defects letter “either to register or

to unregister the curative petition

criminal as the petitioner declines to

file a Certificate by Sr. Advocate

against curative petition criminal” to

the Registrar Misc. through email dated

06.01.2017.

09.01.2017 Registrar Admin, Supreme Court of India

not supplied the requested information

sought in view of section 7(1) of RTI

Act 2005 within 48 hours therefore

petitioner filed a First Appeal with

Registrar Admin & FAA, Supreme Court of

India against online RTI application

vide JUSTC/R/2017/50023 through email

dated 09.01.2017

12.01.2017 Registrar Misc. of this Hon’ble Court

has permitted the petitioner to cure the

defects under para 02 and 03 in response

to the reply email letter dated

06.01.2017 of the petitioner.

Eventually, petitioner has filed two

more paper books of Writ Petition

Criminal 136 of 2016 and Review petition

Criminal 825 of 2016 vide diary no.4184

dated 12.01.2017 against the defects

raised under para 02 of the defects

notification letter vide diary

no.5256/2016/X dated 03.01.2017 issued

by the Registrar Misc. of this Hon’ble

Court. However, the Registrar Misc. of

this Hon’ble Court has neither

registered nor unregistered the Curative

Petition Criminal vide diary no. 41026

but kept the same under scrutiny stage

even after several reminders by the

petitioner.

18.01.2017 Hence this Writ Petition Criminal




WITH


WITH


BETWEEN

1. Om Prakash ………PETITIONER NO.01

S/O Late Sh Deep Narayan Poddar

R/O RZF-893, Netaji Sbhash Marg

Raj Nagar Part-2,

Palam Colony

New Delhi-110077

2. Widow Asha Devi ……PETITIONER NO.02

W/o Late Sh. Deep Narayan Poddar

R/O ASHA DEEP NIWAS

Vill-Kantiya Panchayat,

Shukkar Haat Sonaili,

In front of Durga Mandir

P.S. Kadwa, Distt-Katihar

Bihar-855114

VERSUES

1. Union of India ….RESPONDENT No.01

Through the Cabinet Secretary

Cabinet Secretariat

Rashtrapati Bhawan

New Delhi-110004

2. The Registrar (Misc) ….RESPONDENT No.02

Hon’ble Supreme Court of India

Tilak Marg, New Delhi

3. State of Bihar ….RESPONDENT No.03

Through Chief Secretary,

Old Secretariat, Patna-800015

4. The Hon’ble Patna ….RESPONDENT No.04

High Court,

Through

Hon’ble Registrar General,

Patna High Court

Patna-800028

5. Ld. CJM Court ….RESPONDENT No.05

Through Ld. CJM

Begusarai, Bihar

Civil Court, Ld. CJM Division

at Begusarai, Bihar

6. The Secretary ….RESPONDENT No.06

Cum-Legal Remembrancer

Law Department, Government of Bihar

Main Secretariat Patna-800015

7. Shri Praveen Kumar(IDAS) ….RESPONDENT No.07

Chairman and Managing Director (C&MD),

Indian Drugs & Pharmaceuticals Ltd,

H.O. Scope Complex, Core-6, 1st Floor

7 Lodhi Road, New Delhi-110003

PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 32 OF THE

CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF A

WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS OR

PROHIBITION OR CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER

APPROPRIATE WRIT FOR ENFORCEMENT OF

ARTICLE 21 OF THE CONSTITUTIION OF

INDIA.

To

Hon'ble the Chief Justice of India and His

Lordship's Companion Justices of the

Supreme Court of India. The Humble

petition of the Petitioner abovenamed.

MOST RESPECTFULLY SHEWETH:

1. FACTS OF THE CASSE

The facts leading to the filing of the

present Writ petition criminal are as

under:-

i. The present petition under Article 32

of the Constitution of India is being filed

to enforce the Rights under Article 21 of

the Constitution of India with Writ Petition

Criminal 136 of 2016 and Writ Petition Civil

90 of 2016; whereby an offence of perjury

has been committed by Ld. CJM division

Begusarai Court Bihar and Praveen



officer and Registrar Misc. of Supreme Court

of India has violated the rules as laid down

in the Handbook of Supreme Court of India,







Justice of India’s Court in its office

report, circulated an application for

Constitution bench unregistered; spoiled the

ground of Constitution bench and pushed the


intentionally; on the other hand two judges’

bench of this Hon’ble Court has evaded the

Rule of Law under Order XXXVIII of Supreme

Court Rule 2013 by dismissing the Writ


petition raised substantial question of law

as to the interpretation of the Constitution

required and to be decided by a division

court of not less than five judges; closed

the door of this Hon’ble Court for the

petitioner forever; protected and shielded

the bad elements of State Apparatus; and

harassed, offended and victimized the

petitioner no.01 and 02 which would have

far reaching consequences against the

interest of public at large and against

the right of Senior Citizen Woman in


confidence by reason of the association

or closeness of judge with the subject






priority; which has caused gross

injustice, violated the principle of




ii. That the present petition is also

being filed to cancel the N.B.W dated

08.09.2011 process u/s 83 Cr.Pc. and to quash

the criminal proceedings in case No.5591 of

2013 u/s 498A pending before the Ld. SDJM Court

No.16, Ld. CJM Division at Begusarai under the

judicature of Hon’ble Patna High Court which

has directly infringed the Fundamental Rights

of the petitioner under Article 21 of the

constitution of India whereby and where the Ld.

CJM cum PIO has furnished the false RTI reply

against the same question of law laid down in

the Writ petition Criminal 136 of 2016 and has

erred in holding the frivolous criminal

proceedings for the same cause of action which

has been settled by the Hon’ble High Court of

Delhi in MAT. APPL. 7 of 2012 on 23.07.2013,

which has resulted in miscarriage of justice.

The petitioner is seeking Writ in the nature of

Mandamus, prohibition and certiorari.

iii. Article 21 of Constitution of

India says, “No person shall be deprived of his

life or personal liberty except according to

the procedure established by law”.

WHY THIS WRIT PETITION CRIMINAL?

It is submitted that the present Writ

petition is urged for the following reasons:

a. It is humbly submitted that the

Registrar Misc. of this Hon’ble Court

has neither registered nor unregistered

the Curative Petition Criminal vide

diary no. 41026 without Certificate by

Sr. Advocate but kept the same under

scrutiny stage even after several

reminders by the petitioner.

b. It is further submitted that there has

been illegal confinement of Petitioner

no.01 and 02 since 12 years.

c. It is humbly submitted that the

petitioner is a victim of JUDICIAL

MALFUNCTIONING. The petitioner has

become a dead man whose all families

have been encircled to death in front of

his own eyes and he could not do

anything.

d. It is humbly submitted that the

petitioner no.01 and 02 have been

subjected to silent Death by the NEXUS

OF RTD. JUSTICE OF THIS HON’BLE COURT

AND PRAVEEN KUMAR (IDAS), RESPONDENT

NO.07, EVADING THE RULE OF LAW OF THE

LAND to usurp the life time acquired

property of Petitioner no. 02 in Bihar.

e. It is humbly submitted that an Offence

of PERJURY; abuse of court process; 12

years long criminal conspiracy;

backstabbing; evasion of rule of law by

the Advocates and Judges from lower

court to High Court to Supreme Court of

India since 12 years; NO ACTUAL PARTY

ONLY PROXY WAR THROUGH JUDGES IN TWO

STATES SINCE 12 YEARS from Lower Court

to High Court to Supreme Court of India

and Eight Cases have reached up to the

Hon’ble Supreme Court of India till date

are the main features of this whole

petition.

f. It is humbly submitted that the

matter involves substantial question of

law as to the interpretation of

Constitution is required. Two states

jurisdictions are involved for the same

cause of action and for the same relief

after the settlement of the same matter

by the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi, way

back in 2013.

g. It is humbly submitted that the

Curative Petition Criminal vide diary

no. 41026 dated 09.12.2016 has been

filed by the petitioner before this

Hon’ble Court without a certificate by

Sr. Advocate violating the Rules laid

down for filing a curative petition

because the Registry of this Hon’ble

Court has violated the rules for urgent

mentioning of the Writ Petition Criminal

136 of 2016 before Hon’ble the Chief

Justice of India’s court as per the

grounds laid down in the handbook of the

Supreme Court of India and has

intentionally pushed the petitioner into

the curative stage to close the door of

this Hon’ble Court for the petitioner

no.01 and 02.

h. It is humbly submitted that on the

one hand Registry of this Hon’ble

Court has completely violated the

practice, procedure and rules as laid

down in the Handbook of this Hon’ble

Court and closed the door of Hon’ble

the Chief Justice of India’s Court

and on the other hand two judges’

bench of this Hon’ble Court has

evaded the Rule of Law under Order

XXXVIII of Supreme Court Rules, 2013;

spoiled the ground of Constitution

bench and pushed the petitioner into

Curative stage intentionally to close

the door of this Hon’ble Court for

the petitioner no.01 and 02 forever.

i. It is humbly submitted that

online RTI vide JUSTC/R/2017/50023

dated 05.01.2017 in view of u/s 7(1)

of RTI Act 2005 has been filed

against this act of this Hon’ble

Court and it has been physically

transferred by the Department of

Justice, Ministry of Law & Justice,

Government of India to the Registrar

Admin, Supreme Court of India on

05.01.2017.

j. It is humbly submitted that

there is “no actual party; only proxy

war through Judges in two states

since 2010 from lower Court to High

Court to Hon’ble Supreme Court of

India and eight cases have reached up

to the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India

till date”.

k. It is humbly submitted that an

offence of perjury has been committed

by respondent no. 05, 06 and 07;

backstabbing; 12 years long criminal

conspiracy; evasion of Rule of Law

from lower court to High Court to

Hon’ble Supreme Court of India by the

Advocates and Judges; NEXUS OF RTD

JUSTICE OF THIS HON’BLE COURT AND

SHRI PRAVEEN KUMAR(IDAS), respondent

no.07 are the main features of this

12 years long matter therefore Apex

Institutions are shielding,

protecting the bad elements of state

apparatus and harassing, victimizing,

offending the petitioner no.01 and

02.

l. It is humbly submitted that the

petitioner no.01 and 02 have been

left with only two options now viz.

either to shoot themselves or to

become underground leaving their life

time acquired property in Bihar.

m. It is further submitted that

the NEXUS OF RTD JUSTICE OF THIS

HON’BLE COURT AND SHRI PRAVEEN

KUMAR(IDAS), respondent no.07

involved into this 12 years long

criminal conspiracy to kill

petitioner no.01 and 02 in the

defense area of Palam Colony, New

Delhi and to usurp their property in

Bihar has been apprised to the

Hon’ble Supreme Court of India

through seven cases; Secretary

General of Supreme Court of India

through email dated 17.12.2016 and

31.12.2016; Hon’ble Prime Minister of

India through PMOPG/E/2016/0599866

dated 22.12.2016; Controller General

Defense Accounts (CGDA), Government

of India through email dated

28.12.2016; Hon’ble President of

India through PRSEC/E/2016/16154

dated 30.12.2016; Hon’ble Lok Sabha

Speaker through email dated

06.01.2017; Cabinet Secretary

Government of India through email

dated 07.01.2017; Home Secretary,

Ministry of Home Affairs, Government

of India through email dated

07.01.2017 to take appropriate action

against Rtd. Justice and Praveen

Kumar (IDAS).

n. It is humbly submitted that the

matter is full of bloodshed since 12

years. Above the knee amputee father

of the petitioner no.01 and husband

of petitioner no. 02 who was passing

urine and stool through catheter has

been encircled to death untimely in

2007 by the nexus of bad elements of

Mafia and state apparatus. The oxygen

dependent mother, petitioner no.02,

who is dependent on unemployed &

ailing petitioner no.01 only and

residing on rented accommodation in

Delhi, has been encircled in the same

manner and has been put on risk of

rampant misuse of 498A by the abuse

of court process, likely to be

subjected to death. The flame of the

funeral of the petitioner’s father has

not extinguished till date and still

flaming in the mind of the petitioner

no.01 and it will be added by the flame

of the funeral of the petitioner’s

mother now. The house of the petitioner

no.02 has been turned into Public

toilets with Posters by the elected PRI

leader with the consent of SP Katihar

w.e.f 28.02.2016 to 05.03.2016 without

the permission of the petitioner no.02

violating the Article 21 of the

Constitution of India.

o. That in view of the two judges’

bench order in Writ Petition Criminal

136 of 2016 by this Hon’ble Court, it

seems, the matter will remain in

bloodshed after the passage of 12

years and will end in bloodshed.

Eventually, the natural question

arises herein in the mind of every

common citizen and the petitioner in

particular, as to why then, people

should resort to courts and not to

arms? Nevertheless, the principle of

Natural Justice mandates that every

order of a court should be speaking

order and there is an obligation on

all courts to give reasons for their

conclusion. However, in this case two

judges’ bench order in Writ Petition

Criminal 136 of 2016 does not give any

reasons and justification on what

ground petitioner should approach

Patna High Court with liberty after

the settlement of the same matter by

the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi on

23.07.2013 in MAT. APPL. 7 of 2012

which has resulted in oppressive to

judicial conscience and has shocked

judicial conscience by its failure to

give reasons for its conclusion.

p. It is submitted that N.B.W dated

08.09.2011 process u/s 83 Cr.Pc. has

been issued and kept it secret and

disclosed it through RTI reply dated

27.08.2016 by the Ld. CJM cum PIO,

Civil Court, Begusarai, Bihar

against petitioner no.02, a Senior

Citizen, Oxygen dependent, uneducated

rural, OBC woman, dependent upon

petitioner no.01; after the

settlement of the same matter by the

Hon’ble High Court of Delhi which has

been totally ignored by the bias

judgment of two judges’ bench of this

Hon’ble Court and has been put on

risk of rampant abuse of court

process infringing the principles of

Natural Justice, resulting in

suspension of life or personal

liberty.

q. It is submitted that petitioner

no.01 and 02 cannot remain live or

sustain their life in any state of India

if the Hon’ble Apex Court does not

invoke its inherent power under Article

32 of the Constitution of India to

enforce fundamental rights of the

petitioner under Article 21 of

Constitution of India.

r. It is submitted that the bad

elements of State Apparatus on the one

hand has issued N.B.W process u/s 83

Cr.Pc. and kept it secret since 2011 to

usurp the property of petitioner no.02

in Bihar and on the other hand kept the

petitioner no.01 and 02 under house

arrest illegally in Delhi to kill them

silently.

s. It is submitted that the

petitioner has not been heard properly

in the open court and the two judges’

bench order in Writ Petition Criminal

136 of 2016 suffers from ‘likelihood of

bias’, adversely affecting the life or

personal liberty of the petitioner which

contains material and apparent errors in

passing directions to the petitioner to

approach Patna High Court after the


Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in 2013.

t. It is humbly submitted that the

decision of this Hon’ble Court in Om

Prakash & Anr Vs State of Bihar & Ors in

Writ Petition Criminal 136 of 2016 dated

21.10.2016 and Review Petition Criminal

825 of 2016 dated 01.12.2016 has

resulted in grave injustice and

violation of the fundamental rights

under Article 21 of the Constitution of

India for a common citizen and a Senior

Citizen Woman in particular, it affects

the public confidence in this Court to

protect and defend the Constitutional

Rights of Citizen and perpetuates an

irremediable injustice. It is submitted

that this is an exceptional case which

warrants the exercise of inherent powers

by this Hon’ble Court. Millions of

people across the country who happened

to be victim of rampant atrocities of

malfunctioning of State Apparatus and

victim of rampant misuse of 498A; and

their families have been denied access

to Article 21 of the Constitution of

India and right to life with dignity or

personal liberty even after the

settlement of the matter by one High

Court.

u. That the two judges’ bench order

in Writ Petition Criminal 136 of 2016

has completely violated the third

principles of Natural Justice by way

of not giving reasons for its

conclusions against the contentions

raised regarding violation of Article

21 of the Constitution by the bad

elements of State Apparatus those

have been given license to preserve,

protect and adhere the Rule of Law;

after the settlement of the same

matter by the Delhi High Court, way

back in 2013.

v. That it is respectfully submitted

that the two judges’ bench order in Writ

Petition Criminal 136 of 2016 of this

Hon’ble Court dated 21.10.2016 which

this Hon’ble Court declined to review

vide order dated 01.12.2016,

criminalizes a significant segment of

legal institutions and judicial

institutions in India by sanctioning

them as the natural guardian of the

Constitution and preservation of the

Rule of Law and spoiling the ground for

constitution bench and refusing to refer

the Writ Petition Criminal 136 of 2016

of the petitioner to the constitution

bench which had raised substantial

question of Law as interpretation of

constitution involved in this petition

and to be decided by not less than five

judges as per the Part III of ORDER

XXXVIII of Supreme Court Rules, 2013

which was framed in exercise of the

powers conferred by Article 145 of the

Constitution; implying closed door of

this Hon’ble court for the petitioner

no. 02 to mention the matter before

Hon’ble the Chief Justice of India on

the six grounds viz. Senior Citizen

woman, harassment of OBC woman,

prevention of corruption, issuance of

N.B.W dated 08.09.2011 process u/s 83

Cr.Pc. without the knowledge of

petitioner and after the settlement

of the same matter by the Hon’ble

High Court of Delhi on 23.07.2013 in

MAT. APPL. 7 of 2012, apprehension of

demolition of property, interlinkages

of matter with old matter of this

Hon’ble Court and short matter, as

per the rules laid down in the

handbook of this Hon’ble Court and

pushing the petitioner-in person at the

stage of curative petition

intentionally, which requires a tedious

procedure to follow as per the rules

laid down in the handbook of this

Hon’ble Court to get the Certificate by

a Sr. Advocate to file curative

petition. Moreover, this court refused

to rectify its mistake through defects

notification letter vide diary no.

5356/2016/X dated 03.01.2017 against

Curative Petition Criminal vide diary

no. 41026 dated 09.12.2016 which has

resulted in grievous case of injustice

and denial of Fundamental Rights under

Article 21.

w. It is submitted that the Order

dated 21.10.2016 of this Hon’ble Court

violated the ORDER XXXVIII of Supreme

Court Rules, 2013 which was framed in

exercise of the powers conferred by

Article 145 of the Constitution.

Provision of the Order XXXVIII of

Supreme Court Rules, 2013 says, “1.(1)

Every petition under Article 32 of the

Constitution shall be in writing and

shall be heard by a Division Court of

not less than five Judges provided that

a petition which does not raise a

substantial question of Law as to the

interpretation of the Constitution may

be heard and decided by a Division Court

of less than five Judges, and, during

vacation, by the vacation Judge sitting

singly. (2) All interlocutory and

miscellaneous applications connected

with a petition under Article 32 of the

Constitution, may be heard and decided

by a Division Court of less than five

Judges, and, during vacation, by the

vacation Judge sitting singly,

notwithstanding that in the petition a


interpretation of Constitution is

raised.”

x. It is submitted that the dismissal

of the matter pertaining to

interpretation of constitution by two

judge bench of this Hon’ble Court is

inherently flawed as it contradicts the

explicit opinion expressed for deciding

allegations of “bias” by a Constitution

bench in Yadav vs State of Haryana (AIR

1987 SC, 454). While settling out the

fundamental principles for adjudicating

cases involving allegations of “bias”. A

Constitution bench of this Hon’ble Court

in Yadav vs State of Haryana (AIR 1987

SC, 454) has categorically stated, “the

question is not whether the judge is

actually biased or in fact, decides

partially, but whether there is a real

likelihood of “bias”. Because the

Constitution bench of this Hon’ble Court

in Yadav vs State of Haryana (AIR 1987

SC, 454) has clearly stated that a

“likelihood of bias” is sufficient to

satisfy the legal principle to establish

a case of “bias” as the court has

observed, “The real question is not

whether he was biased. It is difficult

to prove the state of mind of a person.

Therefore, what we have to see is

whether there is reasonable ground for

believing that he was likely to have

been biased”. Because in Yadav vs State

of Haryana (AIR 1987 SC, 454), the

Constitution bench has categorically

stated that the issue of a “likelihood

of bias” may arise from personal reasons

such as “hostility” towards one party or

“friendship” with the other party.

Constitution Bench in Yadav vs State of

Haryana (AIR 1987 SC, 454) has observed,

“What is objectionable in such a case is

not that the decision is actually

tainted with bias but that the

circumstances are such as to create a

reasonable apprehension in the mind of

others that there is likelihood of bias

affecting the decision”. The

Constitution Bench has further

elaborated on this issue, “Justice is

not the function of the courts alone; it

is also the duty of all those who are

expected to decide fairly between

contending parties. The strict standard

applied to authorities exercising

judicial power are being increasingly

applied to administrative bodies, for it

is vital to the maintenance of the rule

of Law in a welfare state where the

jurisdiction of administrative bodies in

increasing at a rapid pace that the

instrumentalities of the State should

discharge their functions in fair and

just manner.”

y. It is submitted that the two


Criminal 136 of 2016 stood in breach of

Article 21 of the Constitution of India,

to say in other words, this Right was

not protected by this Hon’ble Court.

Article 32 confers a guaranteed

fundamental remedy but Article 226

confers no such guaranteed rights. This

state of affairs makes Article 32 a

dominant and specific provision whereas

Article 136 or Article 226 are, in the

context of the enforcement of the

fundamental rights, clearly general and

additional. Petitioner no.01 and 02

cannot remain live or sustain their life

in any state of India if the Hon’ble

Apex Court does not invoke its inherent

power under Article 32 of the

Constitution of India to enforce

fundamental rights of the petitioner

under Article 21 of Constitution of

India.

z. It is submitted that as a point of

our Constitutional law that if there is

breach or non-protection by any organ of

the state, which includes Judiciary

also, remedy under Article 32 is to be

granted as a matter of course; and to

examine the petitioner’s contentions to

appreciate if the Case presented

deserves the grant of such a Remedy on

its merits.

aa. It is submitted that the

petitioner who approached this Hon’ble

Court under Article 32 of the

Constitution of India for enforcement of

his guaranteed Fundamental Right being

subjected to gross violation of Human

Rights; and gross violation of

provisions, procedure and practice of

this Hon’ble Court as laid down in the

handbook of this Hon’ble Court by the

Quasi-Judicial Officer of this Hon’ble

Court.

bb. It is submitted that the two


Criminal 136 of 2016 dated 21.10.2016 of

this Hon’ble Court implies a closed door

of this Hon’ble Court for the petitioner

and depicts that the same stands in

violation of natural justice adversely

and seriously affecting the rights of

the petitioner or the same depicts

manifest injustice rendering the order a

mockery of justice which causes

insurmountable difficulty and immense

public injury.

cc. It is submitted that the present

Writ petition Criminal is being filed as

the petitioner failed to file a

certificate by Sr. Advocate against his

Curative Petition Criminal for which

Registrar Misc. of this Hon’ble Court is

solely responsible for it and to avoid

grave miscarriage of justice to millions

of Senior Citizen Women in- Laws who

have been victimized and aggrieved by

the order dated 21.10.2016 of this

Hon’ble Court and have been put on risk

of rampant atrocities by the

malfunctioning of State Apparatus after

the closure of the matter by the Hon’ble

High Court of Delhi, upon rampant misuse

of 498A across India.

dd. It is submitted that the two


Criminal 136 of 2016 has totally

overlooked the abuse of process by the

Women Protection Officers across India

which has derailed the basic objective

of feminist movement in India from women

empowerment to women criminalization.

ee. It is submitted that the two


Criminal 136 of 2016 has totally

overlooked the contentions of the

petitioner that the abuse of court

process has been rampantly used as a

weapon by the bad elements of State

Apparatus across India for their own

vested interest in weakening the

institution of marriage and encouraging

the morale of those who are indulged in

the commercialization of marriage for

the lust of property and financial

gains.

ff. It is submitted that the two


Criminal 136 of 2016 suffers from error

apparent on the face of record.

gg. It is submitted that the two


Criminal 136 of 2016 disregard past

precedent and the nature of the role of

this Hon’ble Court in safeguarding and

upholding Constitutional Principles and

Fundamental Rights.

hh. It is submitted that the two


Criminal 136 of 2016 does not give

reasons for its conclusions on several

important Question of laws laid down in

this petition.

ii. It is submitted that the two


Criminal 136 of 2016 of this Hon’ble

court go against the established

precedent of this Hon’ble Court which

has inevitably expanded the meaning of

the Fundamental Rights.

FACTS OF ABUSE OF PROCESS & GROSS MISCARRIAGE

OF JUSTICE

iv. That the Constitution of India

assigned a pivotal role on to the Supreme Court

providing therein the supremacy of law with the

rationale being justice is above all. The

exercise of inherent power of this Court also

stands recognized by Order LV Rule 6 of the

Supreme Court Rules, 2013, which reads as

below:

“Nothing in these rules shall be deemed to

limit or otherwise affect the inherent powers

of the Court to make such orders as may be

necessary for the ends of justice or to prevent

abuse of the process of the Court."

v. That Hon’ble court has denied reviewing the

R.P. Crl. 825 of 2016 by its order dated

01.12.2016 without taking into account the face

of records that the matter has already been

settled by the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi on

23.07.2013 in MAT.APPL. NO. 7 of 2012 in favor

of petitioner on the ground of certified copy

of Begusarai Court in case no.9P of 2010 u/s 12

of domestic violence Act and after three SLP(C)

no. 9854/2012, SLP(C) no. 9483/2013, SLP(C) no.

19073/2013 before this Hon’ble Court.

vi. That the petitioner has NOT approached this

Hon’ble Court for dispute settlement but for

STRONG PUNITIVE ACTION against the bad elements

of the State Apparatus in two states who are

indulged in affecting the administration of

Justice; which has resulted in miscarriage of

Justice. Petitioner has elicited data at the

cost of his whole life and placed on record

before this Hon’ble Apex Court for necessary

stern legal action.

vii. That the petitioner has filed interlocutory

application for Constitution bench on

18.10.2016 vide diary no. 77878 against the

Writ Petition Criminal 136 of 2016. Petitioner

did raise ‘substantial question of law as to

the interpretation of the Constitution and this

Hon’ble Court was not required to decide any

‘interlocutory and miscellaneous application’

‘connected with the petition’. The petitioner’s

written submissions also contain these

averments in Writ Petition criminal 136 of 2016

page 18, (para g, h) page 19 (para i) and page

26(para I, J and K).

viii. That the petitioner has placed on record the

bad elements of Legal Aid Institutions in India

and urged to take punitive action against them

to strengthen the institutions.

ix. That the matter is full of bloodshed which has

been caused by the bad element of state

apparatus those have been given license to

preserve, protect and adhere the Rule of law.

The petitioner’s written submissions contain

these averments in page 27(para L); subsequent

clarification by Registrar dated 07.09.2016 at

page 53 (Ans. of defects of para 08, Ground L);

page 27(para N); subsequent clarification by

Registrar dated 07.09.2016 at page 54 (Ans. of

defects of para 08, Ground N) in Writ Petition


x. That handicapped father of the petitioner was

encircled to death by the nexus of Mafia and

state Apparatus in 2007 untimely. The flame of

the funeral of the petitioner’s father has not

extinguished till date and still flaming in the

mind of the petitioner. Voluminous evidences

have been adduced in all the three SLPs filed

before this court in 2012 and 2013.

xi. That petitioner has approached this Hon’ble

Court to plead to take strong punitive action

against them who want to establish the hegemony

of bad elements of state apparatus and want to

govern the mind and body of the vulnerable

common mass.

xii. That the criminal proceeding has taken place in

the state of Bihar because of dismissal of all

SLP(C) no. 9854/2012, SLP(C) no. 9483/2013,

SLP(C) no. 19073/2013 of the petitioner by this

Hon’ble Court which has encouraged the morale

of bad elements of State Apparatus in Bihar as

well as in Delhi. 498A is the outcome of this

encouragement.

xiii. That Petitioner is a victim of malfunctioning

of two State Apparatus viz. Delhi as well as

Bihar.

xiv. That the two states jurisdiction “ground K” has

been taken at page no. 26 in the Writ Petition

Criminal 136 of 2016 and the clarification has

been sought by the Registrar dated 07.09.2016

at page no. 50 to 57 in the same petition.

xv. That the cause of action is the same and the

jurisdictions of two states are involved in it.

The first cause of action arose in the south

west district of Delhi and has been settled by

the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi on 23.07.2013

on the ground of certified copy of Ld. District

Court, Begusarai Bihar, in MAT. APPL. No. 7 of

2012. Trial for the same cause of action

cannot be conducted in the two states by two

Hon’ble High Courts at different point of time

after the settlement by one Hon’ble High Court.

xvi. That the criminal case u/s 498A is not

maintainable in the state of Bihar and is

maintainable in the South West District of

Delhi and F.I.R is to be lodged at Palam

Village Police Station, south west district at

New Delhi wherein the client of Respondent

No.06 has last resided till 15.04.2005.

However, in this matter the client of

Respondent No.06 has filed a criminal case

complaint u/s 498A in the state of Bihar after

a gap of 6 years on 07.02.2011 without an F.I.R

and without police diary and without the

intimation to the petitioner no.01 and 02 as on

date and after the closure of frivolous Case

No.9P of 2010 u/s 12 of domestic violence Act

which was instituted on 30.03.2010 before the

same Ld. CJM division Begusarai.

xvii. That the criminal case complaint (P) no. 397C

of 2011 new CIS generated No. 5591 of 2013 has

been filed on 07.02.2011 and the client of

Respondent no.06 has appeared before Ld. Trial

Court at New Delhi on 09.02.2011 in case no.

HMA-700 of 2010 and supplied the copy of case

no. 9P of 2010 u/s 12 of domestic violence with

N.B.W issued dated 25.08.2010 and did not

supply the copy of criminal case complaint (P)

no. 397C of 2011 new CIS generated No. 5591 of

2013 u/s 498A to the Ld. Trial Court at New

Delhi with criminal intention and managed to

get issued second N.B.W dated 08.09.2011,

Process u/s 83 Cr.P.C. (this information

disclosed through RTI reply by Ld. CJM cum PIO

dated 27.08.2016) and continued to take dates

up till now without the Notice/Summon to the

petitioner with criminal intention.

xviii. That the petitioner has already filed an

application for cancellation of N.B.W dated

25.08.2010 and replication of complaint no.9P

of 2010 u/s 43 (12) of protection of women from

domestic violence Act, 2005 for setting aside

order u/s 18, 19, 20, 21 and 22 through his Ld.

Advocate Shri Arun Kumar Singh, Reg. No.6255 of

1995 on 03.03.2011. It is evident from the

record of all the three SLPs filed before this

Hon’ble Court. However, this record has been

erased by the Ld. CJM division Begusarai which

has been admitted by Ld. CJM through RTI reply

dated 27.08.2016.

xix. That India is an independent Country and not

left with any Princely State which will be

governed by its own State’s Law. Indian states

are quasi-federal and the matter falls within

the complete jurisdiction of Hon’ble Supreme

Court of India who is competent to look into

the matter of two states jurisdiction. Hence,

Writ Petition is maintainable for quashing the

frivolous criminal proceedings pending before

the Ld. CJM division Begusarai.

xx. That fraud, corrupt, criminal and crook

respondent can institute frivolous criminal

litigations under the judicature of all High

Courts in India for the same cause of action

and for the same relief and keep it secret on

the file of the court record against the

petitioner no.01 & 02 to affect the

administration of Justice. Hence, petitioner

will be directed to approach all High Courts

with liberty by this Hon’ble Apex Court.

xxi. That respondent has made a court as a personal

property; records have been manipulated,

distorted and erased from the court records of

district court Begusarai which has been

admitted by Ld. CJM Begusarai through RTI reply

dated 27.08.2016.

xxii. That Ld. CJM has admitted through his RTI reply

dated 27.08.2016 that complaint case no. 9P of

2010 u/s 12 of domestic violence Act is not

pending before the Ld. CJM division Begusarai.

How 498A can be instituted after the closure of

domestic violence under the same Ld. CJM

division?

xxiii. That RTI reply by Ld. CJM

Begusarai dated 27.08.2016 which has enabled

the Hon’ble Court to take stern punitive action

against the malfunctioning of State Apparatus

down the line to act as a deterrence to

strengthen the legal & Judicial institutions in

India.

xxiv. That voluminous evidences adduced

in all the three SLPs and Writ filed before

this Hon’ble Court that the petitioner no. 01 &

02 cannot sustain their life either in Delhi or

in Bihar without the Hon’ble Apex Court’s

intervention and strong punitive action against

the bad elements of the State Apparatus which

has caused irreparable damage and loss to the

petitioner no.01 & 02 over the period of 12

years.

xxv. That the matter involves an incompatible

mixture of Hon’ble Judges & Advocates on the

one hand and a vulnerable common man petitioner

in person on the other hand. This incompatible

mixture cannot board in the same compartment

and travel along with. Hon’ble Judges and

Advocates are almighty, learned person and

equivalent to GOD on this earth while a common

man is a creeping helpless and vulnerable

animal. Hence, the fight between two are

incompatible mixture. However, the Constitution

of India is above all, all the individuals and

all responsible individuals are duty bound to

preserve the sanctity and dignity of our holy

Constitution at the cost of their lives.

xxvi. That the petitioner has been dragged into the

court and has been brutally assailed every

moment by these bad elements of State Apparatus

since 2010 to till date. Hon’ble Judges and

Advocates have not left a single opportunity to

harass, mentally and physically torture the

petitioner from Ld. Trial Court to this Hon’ble

Court and made him a lively dead body. During

the course of time between 2010 to till date,

petitioner has been stopped several times to

put forward the facts before the Court; many

times petitioner has been awarded Judgment at

the entry gate of the court before reaching to

the court room by the bad elements of state

apparatus. Rampant atrocities by the bad

elements of State Apparatus have made the

petitioner ill and are undergoing treatment

with AIIMS. Health of the petitioner has been

severely affected due to the brutality

inflicted upon him by the Indian Courts since

2010 to till date. Records have been placed on

record with all the three SLPs and Writ

petition filed before this Hon’ble Court. It is

also placed on record with the clarification

sought by the Registrar dated 07.09.2016 at

page no. 50 to 57 in Writ Criminal 136 of 2016.

xxvii. That the case has reached up to this stage

after 12 years through RTI against Ld.

Principal Judge Deepa Sharma of Trial Court at

New Delhi for stopping the whole court

proceedings on 30.05.2011 and generating the

wrong order sheet, alleging the petitioner for

requesting for adjournment of the court

proceedings while the date was fixed for WS

filing by the respondent, and subsequent RTI

reply dated 30.08.2011; RTI against Hon'ble

Justice Ms Veena Birbal of Hon'ble High Court

of Delhi for adjourning the court proceeding

while the Legal Aid Advocate Jai Bansal was

absent without the intimation to the petitioner

and the petitioner in person was present and

subsequent RTI reply dated 27.08.2012; CIC

decision order dated 25.09.2014 under the title

Om Prakash Poddar Vs Department of Legal

Affairs against Delhi State Legal Services

Authority for not taking any action against

Legal Aid Advocates; Department of Justice

Government of India letter to NALSA dated

13.04.2015; NALSA letter to Supreme Court Legal

Service Committee dated 13.05.2015; NALSA

letter to Delhi High Court Legal Service

Committee dated 13.05.2015; NALSA letter to

Delhi State Legal Service Authority dated

13.05.2015 and RTI against Ld. Shri Chandra

Mohan Jha, CJM, Civil Court Begusarai Bihar of

Ld. CJM Divivsion District Court Begusarai

Bihar and subsequent RTI reply dated

27.08.2016.

xxviii. That no civilized & reasonable person would

tolerate and appreciate this kind of brutality

inflicted by the bad elements of State

Apparatus ignoring the Rule of Law.

FACTS OF APPREHENSION OF LIKELIHOOD OF BIAS

It is submitted that the Writ petition Criminal

contains genuine apprehension of likelihood of

bias:

xxix. That the State Apparatus of two

States are involved in criminal conspiracy

against petitioner no.01 and 02 to kill the

petitioner no.01 and 02 to usurp their property

in Bihar and the controller of the State

Apparatus, a central Government employee, Shri

Praveen Kumar, respondent no.07 herein this

petition and a Rtd. Justice of this Hon’ble

Court against whom evidence has been adduced as

annexure P-6 page 93 to 95 in Writ Petition

Civil 90 of 2016 reside at New Delhi and all

directions go from Delhi to Bihar. All events

have taken place in Bihar & Delhi against the

petitioner during 2004 to 2016 at the behest of

direction from Delhi. Hence, approaching to

Hon’ble Patna High Court is meaningless and

inefficacious. Records have been placed with

all the three SLPs and two Writs before this

Hon’ble Court. Registry has notified defects

against the original draft of the petitioner in

the Writ (Civil) 90 of 2016 because the name of

Rtd Justice of this Hon’ble Court was

mentioned. Hence, petitioner redrafted it.

However, it is evident from the Letter-Petition

dated 08.10.2016 to Hon’ble the Chief Justice

of India. Another Letter-Petition dated

13.10.2016 to Hon’ble the Chief Justice of

India is annexed herein with this petition.

xxx. That Mr. Praveen Kumar from Indian Defense

Account Service presently as C&MD on deputation

basis with Indian Drugs & Pharmaceuticals Ltd,

Scope Complex, Lodhi Road, New Delhi, as

respondent no.07 in this petition has

encircled us in Bihar as well as in Delhi and

kept us captive illegally in house arrest

virtually. Writ Petition (Civil) 90 of 2016 has

been filed against him for illegal termination

of service before this Hon’ble Court. He tapped

the petitioner and kept him without work at

Head Office of IDPL and dismissed him without

payment of single penny within one month.

Moreover, he has committed an offence of

perjury before the Patiala House Court at New

Delhi.

xxxi. That the bad elements of State Apparatus on the

one hand has issued N.B.W process u/s 83 Cr.Pc.

and kept it secret since 2011 to usurp the

property of petitioner no.02 in Bihar and on

the other hand Mr. Praveen Kumar has kept

petitioner no. 01 and 02 under the house arrest

illegally in Delhi to kill them silently.

xxxii. How State Apparatus and Mafia are involved in

criminal conspiracy against a vulnerable common

man and senior citizen oxygen dependent

voiceless widow OBC woman in two states viz.

Delhi & Bihar since 2004 has been apprised

before this Hon’ble Court from time to time

through SLP(C) no. 9854/2012, SLP(C) no.

9483/2013, SLP(C) no. 19073/2013, Writ (C) 90

of 2016, Writ Petition (Criminal) 136 of 2016,

Review Petition Criminal 825 of 2016 and

Curative Petition Criminal vide diary no.

41026?

xxxiii. That since 2004 to 2009, criminal conspiracy

through local leaders and Mafia and since 2010

to till date, through Indian Courts.

xxxiv. That everything has finished. 12 years long

criminal conspiracy has taken away the life of

my above the knee amputee father untimely in

2007 and we (herein petitioner no.01 and 02)

have been kept captive and house arrest

virtually.

xxxv. That the criminal trespass has been committed

by Mr. Bihari Lal Bubna, an elected PRI leader

with the consent of S.P. of Katihar. House of

the petitioner no.02 has been turned into

public Toilet with the posters w.e.f 28.02.2016

to 05.03.2016 without the permission of the

petitioner no.02 which has been placed on

record with Writ (C) 90 of 2016 before this

Hon’ble Court through interlocutory application

and with this petition as Annexure P-1 to P-5.

False police enquiry report dated 07.05.2016

has been uploaded online by the S.P. Katihar to

the Police Head Quarter, Bihar through Chief

Minister Secretariat denying the very fact of

the incident. However, the villagers have sent

us the photographs of public toilet through

Watsup which has been declined by the police

enquiry report.

True Copies of Police complaint

against installation of Public

Toilet without the permission of

petitioner no.02 by Mr. Bihari

Lal Bubna, an elected PRI leader

to SP Katihar by the petitioner

dated 03.03.2016 is annexed

herewith and marked as Annexure

P-1 (Page from 103 to 105)

True Copies of photographs of

public toilet with posters having

‘text of public toilet for

female’ pasted at the entry gate

of the House of the petitioner

no.02 sent by villagers through

Watsup dated 05.03.2016 &

06.03.2016 to the petitioner

no.02 is annexed herewith and

marked as Annexure P-2 (Page from

106 to 112)

True Copies of translated false

police enquiry report by S.P.

Katihar dated 07.05.2016 to the

In-charge, Janta Darbar Cell,

Police Head Quarter Bihar, Patna

is annexed herewith and marked as

Annexure P-3 (Page from to )

A True Copy of online rejoinder

vide online complaint no.

999990303160113 against false

police enquiry report of S.P.


17.05.2016 is annexed herewith

and marked as Annexure P-4 (Page

from 119 to 120)

True Copies of the photographs of

the victims viz. above the knee

amputee, Headmaster, father Late

Shri Deep Narayan Poddar (1939-

2007) and Oxygen dependent, mother

Widow Asha Rani Devi, petitioner

no.02 herein in this petition and

wife of Late Shri Deep Narayan

Poddar (1946 to till date) whose

house is being turned into public

toilets w.e.f 28.02.2016 to

05.03.2016 by Mr. Bihari Lal

Bubna, an elected Panchayati Raj

Institution (PRI) leader with the

consent of S.P. Katihar is

annexed herewith and marked as

Annexure P-5 (Page from 121 to

123)

xxxvi. That Peculiar fact of this matter is that the

Hon’ble Judges and Advocates have played a role

of respondents throughout the case from Trial

Court to High Court either in Delhi or in

Bihar. Actual party has not even filed a single

piece of paper before the Ld. Trial court at

New Delhi. However, actual party has appeared

once on 09.02.2011 and has filed Vakalatnama

before Ld. Trial Court at New Delhi.

xxxvii. Had the Hon’ble Judges not played a role of

Respondent the matter would have been disposed

of on 30.05.2011 itself? It is evident from the

records of Ld. Trial Court at New Delhi,

Hon’ble High Court of Delhi and SCR of Hon’ble

Supreme Court of India. Bad elements of State

Apparatus have turned the settled matter into

complex matter intentionally for their own

vested interest and have contracted the matter

till date to finish the vulnerable petitioner

by way of trapping him into the courts without

harming themselves. Matter is ex parte and

Hon’ble Judges have played a role of

respondent.

xxxviii. That a Letter-Petition against Ld.

CJM Begusarai affecting the administration of

Justice dated 19.08.2016 vide diary no. 35529

has been rejected by this Hon’ble Court as it

did not cover under the guideline of PIL;

although the matter in the larger public

interest. The bugs would have been stopped and

killed; had this Hon’ble court would have taken

an appropriate action against the Letter-

Petition dated 19.08.2016.

A True Copy of Letter-Petition dated

19.08.2016 to Hon’ble the Chief

Justice of India is annexed herewith


from 124 to 133)

FACTS OF VIOLATION OF PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL

JUSTICE

It is submitted that the Writ Petition contains

sheer violation of principles of natural

justice:

xxxix. That Chief Judicial Magistrate Cum Public

Information Officer District Court Begusarai

Bihar has furnished false and frivolous RTI

reply on 27.08.2016. He has committed an

offence of perjury.

A True Copy of false RTI reply by Ld.

CJM Begusarai dated 27.08.2016 to the

petitioner is annexed herewith and

marked as Annexure P-7 (Page from 134

to 140)

xl. That the RTI reply of Ld. Chief Judicial

Magistrate Cum Public Information Officer

District Court Begusarai Bihar under QUESTION

NO.07 in Case No. 9P of 2010 u/s 12 of domestic

violence Act, "the application for cancellation

of NBW was never pressed before court, so no

order was passed upon it and neither the

petitioner nor his advocate had appeared before

the court" has been falsified by the record of

certified copy of Order dated 4.4.2011 issued

by the same Begusarai Court and the same has

been placed on record at Ld. Trail Court at New

Delhi in Case No. HMA-700 of 2010 and on the

ground of which Hon’ble High Court of Delhi has

pronounced the Judgement in Case No. MAT. APPL.

7 of 2012 on 23.07.2013 in favor of the

petitioner.

xli. That aggrieved by the false RTI

reply dated 27.08.2016 furnished by the Ld. CJM

Begusarai, petitioner has filed Writ Petition

Criminal 136 of 2016 on 30.08.2016 before this

Hon’ble Court for quashing of frivolous

criminal proceedings.

xlii. Application dated 03.10.2016 in

Writ Petition Criminal 136 of 2016 before

Hon’ble the Chief Justice of India for

mentioning of fresh matter for urgent listing

earlier than the scheduled date and urgent

relief is sought against Writ Petition Criminal

136 of 2016 has been sent through R&I

department of this Hon’ble Court after a huge

hue and cry as initially R&I refused to take

this Dak and subsequently being filed through

filing counter of Party in Person as well on

the same date.

A True Copy of application before the

Hon’ble Chief Justice of India for

mentioning of fresh matter urgently

dated 03.10.2016 by the petitioner is


Annexure P-8 (Page from 141 to 151)

xliii. That the petitioner applied for

urgent mentioning of the matter in Writ

Criminal 136 of 2016 before Hon’ble the

Chief Justice of India through Mentioning

officer of this Hon’ble Court on 06.10.2016

without routing through the registry

through caveat clearance counter on the

following grounds viz. Senior Citizen

woman, harassment of OBC woman, prevention

of corruption, issuance of N.B.W dated

08.09.2011 process u/s 83 Cr.Pc. without

the knowledge of petitioner and after the


Hon’ble High Court of Delhi on 23.07.2013

in MAT. APPL. 7 of 2012, apprehension of

demolition of property, interlinkages of

matter with old matter of this Hon’ble

Court and short matter, as has been laid

down in the handbook of this Hon’ble Court.

A True Copy of filing index of

Urgent Mentioning application


India’s Court through Mentioning

Officer dated 06.10.2016 by the

petitioner through Caveat clearance

Counter without receipt is annexed

herewith and marked as Annexure P-9

(Page from 152 to 152)

xliv. That the Mentioning officer of

this Hon’ble Court has intentionally listed

my urgent mentioning application in Writ

Petition Criminal 136 of 2016 before Court

No.06 instead of Hon’ble the Chief Justice

of India’s Court in the evening of

06.10.2016 despite of my strong protest to

directly allow me for mentioning before

Hon’ble the Chief Justice of India as per

the provisions laid down in the handbook of

this Hon’ble Court.

xlv. Hence, the petitioner is aggrieved by

the intentional act of Mentioning officer for

listing the matter before the Court No.06 as

the same Hon’ble bench of this Court No.06 has

dismissed the Writ (C) 90 of 2016, although the

petitioner had apprised the Hon’ble Court

through interlocutory applications that 498A

has been instituted in the state of Bihar even

after the settlement of the same matter by the

Hon’ble High Court of Delhi.

xlvi. That the petitioner submitted before

the Hon’ble bench of Court no.06 that the

mentioning officer has cheated the petitioner

and intentionally listed the matter for

mentioning before this court. Petitioner has

humbly submitted before the Hon’ble Court No.06

to grant him liberty to mention the matter


Court. Hence, order dated 07.10.2016 has been

passed by the Hon’ble Court No. 06 in Writ

(Crl.) 136 of 2016.

A True Copy of order dated

07.10.2016 in Writ Petition

Criminal 136 of 2016 passed by this

Hon’ble Court is annexed herewith


from 153 to 153)

xlvii. That aggrieved by the intentional act

of Mentioning officer, the petitioner no.02 has

submitted Letter-Petition dated 08.10.2016 and

13.10.2016 before Hon’ble the Chief Justice of

India through email; speed post; and by hand

respectively against rampant atrocities on

Senior Citizen, Oxygen dependent, uneducated,

OBC, voiceless, rural woman in two states viz.

Bihar as well as in Delhi since 12 years.



Chief Justice of India is annexed

herewith and marked as Annexure P-

11 (Page from 154 to 171)

xlviii. After an Order dated 07.10.2016 in

Writ Petition Criminal 136 of 2016 passed by

this Hon’ble Court and upon the request made by

the petitioner, petitioner being called on

17.10.2016 by the mentioning officer for fresh

application for urgent mentioning before

Hon’ble the Chief Justice of India’s Court,

however petitioner being harassed whole day

from PRO to mentioning officer and directly

refused by the mentioning officer as his role

is over now.

xlix. Upon direct refusal by mentioning

officer to allow the petitioner to mention the

matter before Hon’ble the Chief Justice of

India as per the provisions laid down in the

handbook of Hon’ble Supreme Court of India and

the schedule listing of the matter fixed by the

registry on 21.10.2016; the petitioner left

with no option and filed an application for

listing this matter before the constitution

bench of seven Judges vide diary no. 77878

dated 18.10.2016 in Writ Petition Criminal 136

of 2016.

A True Copy of application for

constitution bench along with

Affidavit dated 18.10.2016 vide

diary no. 77878 filed against Writ

Petition (Criminal) 136 of 2016 is



183)

l. Office report dated 20.10.2016 against Writ

Petition Criminal 136 of 2016 has neither been

supplied nor been uploaded at the website of

this Hon’ble Court by the Registrar, Section X.

Petitioner has applied for the certified copy

of the same on 28.10.2016 with an application

registration no. A1-32350/2016 vide diary no.

PC-732 and received the certified copy of

Office-Report on 08.11.2016. Office-Report

dated 20.10.2016 does not contain the

application dated 03.10.2016 before Hon’ble the

Chief Justice of India for mentioning of fresh

matter urgent listing earlier than the

scheduled date and urgent relief is sought

against Writ Petition Criminal 136 of 2016. The

record has not been placed on record and has

been intentionally erased from the office

report. Office-Report dated 20.10.2016 further

wrongly records the date of filing of

application for listing the writ petition

before a constitution bench on 18th January

2016 while the petitioner has filed the same on

18th October 2016. Moreover, it is circulated

‘unregistered’. Criminal Misc petition no. has

not been allotted against application dated

18.10.2016 intentionally by the Registrar.

A True Copy of certified copy of

office report dated 20.10.2016

by the Registrar, Section X in

Writ Petition Criminal 136 of

2016 is annexed herewith and

marked as Annexure P-13 (Page

from 184 to 185)

li. That this Hon’ble Court has

dismissed the Writ petition Criminal 136 of

2016 with liberty on 21.10.2016 and directed

the petitioner to approach Patna High Court.

A True Copy of final Order dated


Court in Writ Petition (Criminal)

136 of 2016 is annexed herewith


from 186 to 186)

lii. As per the direction by this

Hon’ble Court in Writ Petition Criminal 136 of

2016, Petitioner tried to approach Patna High

Court through Second Appeal vide diary no.

183722 dated 03.11.2016 via Central Information

Commission (CIC) on the ground of ‘Life or

Personal liberty’ with a prayer for urgent

hearing on 30.11.2016 but failed to approach

Patna High Court.

A True Copy of email letter of

prayer by the petitioner for

urgent hearing of Second Appeal

vide diary no. 183722 dated

03.11.2016 via Central Information

Commission (CIC) on the ground of

‘Life or Personal liberty’ dated

30.11.2016 is annexed herewith and


187 to 187)

liii. That this Hon’ble Court has also

dismissed the Review Petition Criminal 825 of

2016 on 01.12.2016, upholding its final order


of 2016.

A True Copy of Order dated


Court in Review Petition

(Criminal) 825 of 2016 is annexed



liv. DS, Central Registry, CIC has

turned the request of Petitioner down on the

ground of “no ground of ‘life or personal

liberty’ at any stage i.e. RTI application, 1st

Appeal or even in 2nd Appeal has been made out

or claimed by the petitioner”. Although, the

content of the second appeal is self-

explanatory at page no.02 and para no. 6, which

reads as “another N.B.W dated 08.09.2011

process u/s 83 Cr.Pc. has been issued by the

same CJM division against applicant and his

Senior Citizen ailing mother in another

frivolous criminal case no. 5591 of 2013 u/s

498A after the closure of case no. 9P of 2010

and kept it secret since then without the

knowledge of applicant to usurp his property in

Bihar”. Moreover, CIC has invoked section 7(1)

of RTI Act 2005 in N.N. Kalia Vs University of

Delhi case and recorded its observation “the

life and liberty provision can be applied only

in cases where there is an imminent danger to

the life and liberty of a person and the non-

supply of the information may either lead to

death or grievous injury to the concerned

person. Liberty of a person is threatened if

she or he is going to be incarcerated or has

already been incarcerated and the disclosure of

the information may change that situation. If

the disclosure of the information would obviate

the danger then it may be considered under the

provision of section 7(1). The imminent danger

has to be demonstrably proven”. In this case

imminent danger has been demonstrably proven

through photographs of the above the knee

amputee father of the petitioner who has been

encircled to death untimely by the nexus of bad

elements of State Apparatus and Mafia in 2007

and through the photographs of oxygen dependent

71 year old mother, as petitioner no.02 in this

petition, who is residing on rented

accommodation at New Delhi and dependent upon

unemployed & ailing petitioner no.01 only; and

her life has been threatened by the issuance of

frivolous N.B.W dated 08.09.2011 process u/s 83

Cr.Pc. after the settlement of the same matter

by the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi; and is

going to be incarcerated which may either lead

to her death or grievous injury to the

petitioner no.02 and the petitioner no.01.

Hence, this was a fit case to invoke section

7(1) of RTI Act 2005 by CIC. Ironically, the

second appeal does not have any defined format

where applicant can mention the exact word of


provision of section 7(1) applicable as per the

RTI Act 2005. Nevertheless, Online CIC

complaint format contains this dropdown box of



Petitioner has also filed complaint against

Patna High Court to CIC under the dropdown box

of ‘life or personal liberty’ to make the


A True Copy of email reply by

DS(CR) CIC turning down the

petitioner’s prayer for urgent

registration of Second Appeal on

the ground of ‘life or personal

liberty’ dated 02.12.2016 is



194)

A True Copy of online complaint by

the petitioner against Patna High

Court to CIC under the dropdown

box of ‘life or personal liberty’

to make the provision of section

7(1) applicable is annexed



lv. That the petitioner has filed

Curative Petition Criminal vide diary no.41026

dated 09.12.2016 before this Hon’ble Court

without a Certificate by Sr. Advocate WITH the

valid reason under para 15 of the same

petition.

lvi. That the petitioner has approached

the Secretary General of this Hon’ble Court for

urgent mentioning of the matter before Hon’ble

the Chief Justice of India’s court through

email dated 17.12.2016.






the petitioner dated 17.12.2016 is



201)

lvii. That the petitioner has approached

Registrar Misc. Section X of this Hon’ble Court

through email dated 22.12.2016 for “seeking

status of email letter dated 17.12.2016

addressed to Secretary General of SCI and

subsequently received by your office dated

19.12.2016 and how long diary no. 41026 dated

09.12.2016 will remain under scrutiny stage-

reg”.



Hon’ble Court for seeking status

of email dated 17.12.2016 by the

petitioner through email dated



202 to 202)

lviii. That the petitioner has again

approached the Secretary General of this

Hon’ble Court for urgent mentioning of the


India’s court through email dated 31.12.2016.









204)

lix. That the Registrar Misc. Section X

has notified defects vide diary no.5356/2016/X

dated 03.01.2017 against Curative Petition

Criminal vide diary no. 41026.

A True Copy of notification of

defects letter vide diary no.

5356/2016/X dated 03.01.2017

against curative petition criminal

vide diary no. 41026 issued by


Hon’ble Court is annexed herewith


from 205 to 205)

lx. That aggrieved by the notification

of defects letter issued by the Registrar Misc.

Section X, the petitioner has filed online RTI

request in view of section 7(1) of RTI Act 2005

vide JUSTC/R/2017/50023 dated 05.01.2017

against this Hon’ble Court; and it has been

physically transferred by Department of

Justice, Government of India to the Registrar

Admin, Supreme Court of India dated 05.01.2017

A True Copy of RTI request vide

JUSTC/R/2017/50023 dated

05.01.2017 in view of section 7(1)

of RTI Act 2005 by the petitioner

physically transferred by,

Department of Justice, Government

of India to the Registrar Admin,

Supreme Court of India dated



206 to 206)

lxi. That the petitioner has replied

back the notification of defects letter issued

by Registrar Misc. against curative petition

criminal on 06.01.2017 through email.

A True Copy of reply of

notification of defects letter

against curative petition criminal


petitioner through email letter

dated 06.01.2017 is annexed



lxii. That Registrar Admin, Supreme

Court of India neither supplied the requested

information sought in view of section 7(1) of

RTI Act 2005 within 48 hours nor forwarded to

the Public Authority under section 6(3)(i)(ii)

of RTI Act, 2005 to which the subject matter is

more closely connected with. Hence, petitioner

filed a First Appeal with Registrar Admin,

Supreme Court of India against online RTI

application vide JUSTC/R/2017/50023 through

email dated 09.01.2017 and requested him to

pass an order to supply the Information or

supply the same as per the rules under RTI Act-

2005 in view of Section 7(1) of RTI Act 2005.

A True Copy of First Appeal with

Registrar Admin, Supreme Court of

India against online RTI

application vide

JUSTC/R/2017/50023 in view of

section 7(1) of RTI Act 2005 by




213)

lxiii. Registrar Misc. of this Hon’ble

Court has permitted the petitioner to cure the

defects under para 02 and 03 in response to the

reply email letter dated 06.01.2017 of the

petitioner. Eventually, petitioner has filed

two more paper books of Writ Petition Criminal

136 of 2016 and Review petition Criminal 825 of

2016 vide diary no.4184 dated 12.01.2017

against the defects raised under para 02 of the

defects notification letter vide diary

no.5256/2016/X dated 03.01.2017 issued by the

Registrar Misc. of this Hon’ble Court. However,

the Registrar Misc. of this Hon’ble Court has

neither registered nor unregistered the

Curative Petition Criminal vide diary no. 41026

but kept the same under scrutiny stage even

after several reminders by the petitioner.

A True Copy of filing index

against Curative Petition Criminal


petitioner dated 12.01.2017 is



214)

lxiv. That petitioner no.01 and 02

cannot remain live or sustain their life in any

state of India if the Hon’ble Apex Court does

not invoke its inherent power under Article 32

of the Constitution of India to enforce

guaranteed fundamental rights of the petitioner

under Article 21 of Constitution of India.

FACTS AND CONTENTIONS OF PETITIONER WITH RESPECT

TO ARTICLE 21 OF THE CONSTITUTION; RIGHT OF

DIGNITY, LIBERTY AND AUTONOMY

It is submitted that factual contention of the

petitioner in respect to Article 21 of

Constitution of India:

a) For that Article 21 of the

Constitution protects an individual’s right

to autonomy, liberty, basing this submission

on the jurisprudence of this Hon’ble Court.

The petitioner’s written submissions contain

these averments in pages 15 to 17(para xxvii

to xxix); page 27, (para L, M, N); Page 31,

(para W, X); page 32, (para Y) and page 34

(para BB) and Pages 50 to 57 where

clarification has been sought by the

registrar dated 07.09.2016 in Writ Petition


FACTS OF THE LEGALITY OF ARTICLE 145 (1).

That the Supreme Court Rules, 2013 was framed in

exercise of the powers conferred by Article 145 of

the Constitution. ORDER XXXVIII of the said Rules,

2013 runs as under:

“1.(1) Every petition under Article 32 of the

Constitution shall be in writing and shall be heard

by a Division Court of not less than five Judges

provided that a petition which does not raise a


interpretation of the Constitution may be heard and

decided by a Division Court of less than five

Judges, and, during vacation, by the vacation Judge

sitting singly.

(2) All interlocutory and miscellaneous

applications connected with a petition under

Article 32 of the Constitution, may be heard and

decided by a Division Court of less than five

Judges, and, during vacation, by the vacation Judge

sitting singly, notwithstanding that in the

petition a substantial question of Law as to the

interpretation of Constitution is raised.”

The effect of the aforesaid Order is:

(a) That Writ petition involves

questions pertaining to the interpretation

of the Constitution, the Writ Petition must

be heard by a bench of not less than five

Judges;

(b) That if Writ Petition ‘does not

raise a substantial question of Law as to

the interpretation of the Constitution’ it

‘may be heard and decided by a Division

Bench of the Court of less than five

Judges, and, during vacation, by the

vacation Judge sitting singly’;

(c) That all ‘interlocutory and

miscellaneous applications’ connected with

a petition under Article 32 of the

Constitution, may be heard and decided by a

Division Court of less than five

Judges,……’; and

(d) That all that can be decided in

matters mentioned at interlocutory and

miscellaneous application’, leaving the

actual Writ Petition intact before the

Court to be disposed of as per the law and

the Constitution.

That the Writ raises ‘substantial question of law

as to the interpretation of the Constitution is

required.

FACTS OF EVASION OF RULE OF LAW

It is submitted that the Rule of Law has been

evaded by this Hon’ble Court:

a. That the Order dated 21.10.2016 of

this Hon’ble Court in Writ Petition Criminal

136 of 2016 has evaded the rule of law under

ORDER XXXVIII of Supreme Court Rules, 2013

which was framed in exercise of the powers

conferred by Article 145 of the Constitution.

Provision of the Order XXXVIII of Supreme Court

Rules, 2013 says, “1.(1) Every petition under

Article 32 of the Constitution shall be in

writing and shall be heard by a Division Court

of not less than five Judges provided that a

petition which does not raise a substantial

question of Law as to the interpretation of the

Constitution may be heard and decided by a

Division Court of less than five Judges, and,

during vacation, by the vacation Judge sitting

singly. (2) All interlocutory and miscellaneous

applications connected with a petition under

Article 32 of the Constitution, may be heard

and decided by a Division Court of less than

five Judges, and, during vacation, by the

vacation Judge sitting singly, notwithstanding

that in the petition a substantial question of

Law as to the interpretation of Constitution is

raised.”

b. That the Writ petition raises

‘substantial question of law as to the

interpretation of the Constitution is required.

The humble Petitioner had submitted this in his

Writ Petition, pleadings/arguments and through

written submission followed by interlocutory

application for constitution bench on

18.10.2016 vide diary no. 77878 in Writ

Petition Criminal 136 of 2016.

c. That During the course of hearing

on 21.10.2016 in Writ Petition Criminal 136 of

2016, the petitioner not being heard properly

rather directed to engage Advocate although the

Petitioner had clarified the strong reason for

not engaging any Advocate against this matter

in writing in the Writ Petition Criminal 136 of

2016 as well as with the Registrar during the

interaction interview dated 03.10.2016 that

“Hon’ble Judges and Advocates have played a

role of Respondent throughout the case from

Trial Court to High Court”.

d. That the Order of this Hon’ble

Court incorrectly directs the petitioner to

approach Patna High Court, which has resulted

in gross miscarriage of justice.

2. QUESTION OF LAW:

That the main questions of Law to be decided in

this petition are:-

a) Whether after the settlement of the matter

by High Court of Delhi; petitioner has to

approach Patna High Court for the same cause

of action and for the same relief wherein

the respondent has already appeared into the

matter and contested the matter indirectly?

b) Whether the matter involves two states

jurisdictions for the same cause of action;

Hon’ble Apex Court must not invoke its

inherent power under Article 32 to enforce

and guarantee the fundamental rights of the

citizen under Article 21?

c) Whether the Writ petition involves questions

pertaining to the interpretation of the

Constitution; the Writ Petition is liable to

be dismissed by a bench of less than five

Judges?

d) Whether the petitioner approached to this

Hon’ble Apex Court under Article 32 against

rampant atrocities by the state apparatus in

two states and for enforcement of his

fundamental rights under Article 21 to be

subjected to violation of principle of

Natural Justice by this Hon’ble Court?

e) Whether the Writ petition which requires

interpretation of Constitution to be

dismissed with liberty and to be directed

the petitioner to approach to Patna High

Court by the two Judges Bench of this

Hon’ble Court; does not evade Order XXXVIII

of Supreme Court Rules, 2013 which was

framed in exercise of the powers conferred

by Article 145 of the Constitution? And

whether Article 226 confers guaranteed

fundamental rights to the petitioner for

enforcement of Article 21?

SUBSTANTIAL QUESTION OF CONSTITUTIONAL LAW AS TO

THE INTERPRETATION OF THE CONSTITUTION IS

INVOLVED

I. Article 32 confers a guaranteed

fundamental remedy but Article 226 confers no

such guaranteed rights. This state of affairs

makes Article 32 a dominant and specific

provision whereas Article 136 or Article 226

are, in the context of the enforcement of the

fundamental rights, clearly general and

additional.

II. Dr. Ambedkar described Article 32

of the Constitution as “the very soul and the

very heart of the Constitution”. Article 136, a

discretionary remedy, cannot be elevated to

become the very soul of the Constitution.

III. In a given case where certain

Fundamental Rights are violated or non-

protected, a remedy under Article 32 must be

granted as a matter of course;

IV. Remedy under Article 32 of the

Constitution of India is a matter of course

whenever on account of state action a

Fundamental Right granted as per provisions of

the Part III of the Constitution are breached,

or ignored.

V. That, as such, the Remedy under

Article 32 of the Constitution is ex propio

Vigore available to protect a citizen’s

Fundamental Right which he believes to have

been breached or non-protected by a judicial

order of the Superior Judiciary;

VI. That there is breach of Article 21

of the Constitution of India, to say in other

words, this Right was not protected by this

Hon’ble Court.

VII. As a point of our Constitutional

law that if there is breach or non-protection

by any organ of the state, which includes

Judiciary also, remedy under Article 32 is to

be granted as a matter of course; and

VIII. To examine the petitioner’s

contentions to appreciate if the Case presented

deserves the grant of such a Remedy on its

merits.

3. GROUNDS

That being aggrieved by order dated

26.08.2016 passed by Ld. SDJM Court No.16,

CJM division Begusarai Bihar; subsequent

Order dated 21.10.2016 passed by this

Hon’ble Court and further order dated

03.01.2017 issued by the Registrar Misc. of

this Hon’ble Court, the petitioner is

challenging the same on the following

amongst other grounds: -

A. BECAUSE an N.B.W dated 08.09.2011

process u/s 83 Cr.Pc. in case no. 5591

of 2013 u/s 498A has been issued against

petitioner no.01 and 02, kept it secret

and disclosed it through RTI reply dated

27.08.2016 by the Ld. CJM cum PIO Civil

Court, Begusarai, Bihar through vide

letter no.115 dated 22.08.2016 under the

reply of question no.02 against case

no.5591 of 2013 furnished by Shri Nitin

Kaushik, S.D.J.M, Court Begusarai (True

copy of RTI reply by Ld. CJM Begusarai

dated 27.08.2016 annexed herein with

this Writ petition criminal as Annexure

P-7) after the settlement of the same

matter by the Hon’ble High Court of

Delhi on 23.07.2013 in MAT.APPL. NO. 7

of 2012 in favor of petitioner on the

ground of certified copy of the same CJM

division Begusarai against case no.9P of

2010 u/s 12 of domestic violence Act and

after three SLP(C) no. 9854/2012, SLP(C)

no. 9483/2013, SLP(C) no. 19073/2013

before this Hon’ble Court.

B. BECAUSE an offence of perjury has

been committed by respondent no. 05, 06

and 07.

C. BECAUSE the petition raises

substantial question of law as to the

interpretation of Constitution required.

D. BECAUSE the jurisdiction of the

ailing petitioner no.01 is south west

district of Delhi and the jurisdiction

of ailing petitioner no.02 is Bihar

however the first cause of action arose

in the south west district of Delhi and

has been settled by the Hon’ble High

Court of Delhi.

E. BECAUSE the petitioner has been

stopped and offended by the Registry,

Mentioning Officer and PRO by this

Hon’ble Court to mention the matter


India’s court. It is evident from an

application before Hon’ble the Chief

Justice of India’s court for mentioning

of fresh matter urgently dated 3.10.2016

through R&I and Registry both and

subsequent suppression of the record by

the Registrar Misc. Section X as evident

from certified copy of Office-Report

dated 20.10.2016 in Writ Petition

Criminal 136 of 2016 annexed herein as

annexure P-13; an application for

urgent mentioning of the matter


India’s court through Mentioning

officer of this Hon’ble Court dated

06.10.2016 without routing through

the registry as per the provisions


Hon’ble Court and subsequent listing

of matter before Court no.06 instead

of Hon’ble the Chief Justice of

India’s Court on 07.10.2016 despite

of strong protest by the petitioner;

order dated 07.10.2016 passed by this

Hon’ble Court in Writ Petition

Criminal 136 of 2016 that “though the

matter has been placed before the

court as mentioning item, the

petitioner submitted that he would

like to mention the matter before

Hon’ble the Chief Justice of India”;

Letter-Petition dated 08.10.2016

against mentioning officer of this

Hon’ble Court through R&I; Letter-

Petition dated 13.10.2016 against

rampant atrocities on Senior Citizen,

Oxygen dependent, uneducated, OBC,

voiceless, rural woman through R&I;

after an order dated 07.10.2016 passed

by this Hon’ble Court in Writ Petition

Criminal 136 of 2016 and upon request by

the petitioner, petitioner being called

on 17.10.2016 for fresh mentioning of

the matter urgently before Hon’ble the

Chief Justice of India’s court by the

mentioning officer and being harassed

whole day from PRO to mentioning officer

and directly being refused by the

mentioning officer at the end of the day

that his role is over now; consequently,

an application was moved for listing

this matter before the constitution

bench of seven Judges vide diary no.

77878 dated 18.10.2016 in Writ Petition

Criminal 136 of 2016; office report

dated 20.10.2016 of this Hon’ble Court

neither being uploaded at the website in

public domain nor being supplied to the

petitioner even after several reminders

orally and through email dated

27.10.2016 to the Registrar Misc.

Section X; application for the certified

copy of the same was made on 28.10.2016

with an application registration no. A1-

32350/2016 vide diary no. PC-732 and

received the certified copy of same on

08.11.2016 in Writ Petition Criminal 136

of 2016 is annexed herein as Annexure P-

13; all evidences have been placed on

record with this Writ Petition Criminal

and are annexed herein as Annexures P-

8 to P-9 and P-11 to P-13.

F. BECAUSE the petitioner who

approached this Hon’ble Court under

Article 32 of the Constitution of India

for enforcement of his guaranteed

Fundamental Right being subjected to

gross violation of Human Rights; and

gross violation of provisions, procedure

and practice of this Hon’ble Court as


Hon’ble Court by the Quasi-Judicial

Officer of this Hon’ble Court.

G. That a well-designed criminal

conspiracy being commissioned and

strategy being adopted against the

petitioner by the Quasi-Judicial Officer

of this Hon’ble Court to spoil the valid

ground of Constitution bench against the

Writ Petition Criminal 136 of 2016 and

make it liable to be dismissed with

liberty by this Hon’ble Court and to

close the door of the Hon’ble Apex Court

under Article 32 for enforcement of

guaranteed fundamental right of the

petitioner under Article 21.

H. BECAUSE the Writ petition requires

to follow the rule of law under Order

XXXVIII of Supreme Court Rules, 2013.

I. BECAUSE Writ petition involves

substantial questions of law pertaining to

the interpretation of the Constitution, the

Writ Petition is not liable to be dismissed

by a bench of less than five Judges.

J. BECAUSE the order has severely

affected the administration of Justice

delivered by the Hon’ble High Court of

Delhi; way back in 2013 in favor of

petitioner.

K. BECAUSE there is a sheer violation

of Principle of Natural Justice.

L. BECAUSE the voluminous evidences

adduced and substantive contentions

urged against the perjury and

malfunctioning of two states apparatus

by the petitioner through SLP(C) no.

9854/2012, SLP(C) no. 9483/2013, SLP(C)

no. 19073/2013, Writ (C) 90 of 2016,

Writ (Crl.) 136 of 2016, Review Petition

(Crl.) 825 of 2016 and Curative Petition

(Crl.) vide diary no.41026 before this

Hon’ble Court.

M. BECAUSE Public Confidence in

administration of justice will be shaken

by reason of the association or

closeness of judge with the subject


precedent of procedural Judicial

System, encourage malfunctioning of

the State Apparatus; weaken the

basic fabric of the institutions;

ignore constitutional priority; if

the order is permitted to stand.

N. BECAUSE the Order offends the

interest of the neglected Senior Citizen

in the family.

O. BECAUSE Order discourages and

demotivates common man to save the life

of an old age person and aged person

will be neglected in the every

household. No one would try to save the

life of an aged person at the cost of

his or her life in the fast moving

material world.

P. BECAUSE the dignity of our holy

Constitution as well as the dignity of

our Hon’ble Apex Court is threatened by

the bad elements of state apparatus.

Q. BECAUSE order passes wrong message

to the society that Hon’ble Apex Court

is shielding and protecting the bad

elements of state apparatus, ignoring

malfunctioning of State Apparatus and

maintains delightful silence against the

protection of Fundamental Rights of a

common citizen.

R. BECAUSE there is a sheer violation

of Human Rights throughout the case from

Ld. Trial Court to the Hon’ble Apex

Court.

S. BECAUSE order passes wrong message

to the petitioner that all events have

taken place against him (since 2010 to

till date, either in Bihar or in Delhi)

so far at the behest of Hon’ble Apex

Court.

T. BECAUSE order overshadows the

Constitutional priority over individual

priority.

U. BECAUSE order encourages the

morale of bad elements of state

Apparatus and weaken the basic fabric of

the institutions.

V. BECAUSE order encourages the

morale of those who consider court as

their personal property.

W. BECAUSE the matter is not an

individual as it is in the interest of

larger Public. Thus, power elite can

infringe the right to life or personal

liberty of a vulnerable common man or

woman and take them on hostage to make

them a bonded labour; can infringe the

right to live with dignity.

X. BECAUSE the matter is a

constitutional as well. It is the

concern of all citizens. Thus, after

winning from one High Court one cannot

go to another High Court for the same

cause of action and for the same relief.

Y. BECAUSE the matter is also concern

in the interest of all Senior Citizen

Men and Women.

Z. BECAUSE order weakens the

institution of marriage and encourages

the morale of those who are indulged in

the commercialization of marriage for

the lust of property and financial

gains.

AA. BECAUSE order encourages the

rampant misuse of 498A in the country.

BB. BECAUSE order does not make the

women responsible and accountable

towards the Senior Citizen disabled and

ailing in-laws.

CC. BECAUSE order gives wrong

direction to the feminist movement in

India.

DD. BECAUSE order sanctions the

malfunctioning of Women Protection

Officers in India down the line.

EE. BECAUSE order encourages

irresponsibility, unaccountability and

unpunished action against Women

Protection Officer so that the genuine

victims suffers and frauds enjoys the

benefit out of it.

FF. BECAUSE there is rampant misuse

and abuse of power by the Women

Protection Officers for their own vested

interest defeating the very purpose of

the institutional arrangements made

under the domestic violence Act 2005 for

women safety and empowerment those

genuinely victimized in the society.

GG. BECAUSE it raises questions on the

part of the credibility of the State

Governments for appointing wrong

candidates as Women Protection Officers

in the State.

HH. BECAUSE essential training and

capacity of the Women Protection

Officers are undermined, lacked a sense

of discrimination between genuine and

frivolous domestic violence to exercise

their power carefully and diligently to

ascertain the gravity of the affected

Women.

II. BECAUSE there is hegemony of bad

elements of state Apparatus who want to

govern the mind and body of a common man

or woman.

JJ. BECAUSE the petitioner’s life is

at stake and this order will kill the

petitioner no.01 and 02 slowly and

silently.

KK. BECAUSE Shri Praveen Kumar from

Indian Defense Account Service presently

as C&MD on deputation basis with Indian

Drugs & Pharmaceuticals Ltd, Scope

Complex, Lodhi Road, New Delhi and as

respondent no.07 in this Writ petition

has encircled us in Bihar as well as in

Delhi and kept us captive illegally

under house arrest virtually. Writ

Petition (Civil) 90 of 2016 has been

filed against him for illegal

termination of service before this

Hon’ble Court. He tapped the petitioner

and kept him without work at Head Office

of IDPL and dismissed him without

payment of single penny within one

month. Moreover, he has committed an

offence of perjury before the court of

Patiala House Court at New Delhi.

LL. BECAUSE the protection officer

under protection of women against domestic

violence Act 2005, Begusarai, Bihar has

misused and abused her vested power by way

of filing frivolous litigation against the

petitioner and his ailing mother after a

gap of 5 years, planted criminal conspiracy

against the petitioner and his ailing

mother putting their life and liberty at

stake, which has resulted in irreparable

loss to the petitioner and his mother.

MM. BECAUSE Mr. Gopal Kumar, Advocate,

Reg. no. 836/1991, practicing under Ld.

Civil Court Begusarai, Bihar and husband of

Ms Veena Kumari, Protection Officer, under

domestic violence Act, Begusarai, Bihar has

managed to get issued frivolous N.B.W dated

25.08.2010 against the petitioner and his

ailing mother after a gap of 5 years for

his own vested interest, misused the law of

the land, diluted the piousness of Judicial

System and planted criminal conspiracy

against the petitioner and his ailing

mother putting their life and liberty at

stake, which has resulted in irreparable

loss to the petitioner and his mother.

NN. BECAUSE the legal Aid services

have been denied indirectly by all the

three layers of Ld. Legal Aid

Institutions in India to the petitioner

in the past and Ld. Central Information

Commission (CIC) order dated 25.09.2014

in “Om Prakash Poddar Vs Department of

Legal Affairs” and NALSA letter dated

13.05.2015 have not been complied by the

Ld. Legal Aid Institutions. No action

has been taken against the Ld. Legal Aid

Institutions yet, which has resulted in

miscarriage of justice; which also

amounts to infringement of the

fundamental rights of the petitioner

under Article 14 of the Constitution of

India. Evidences have been adduced in

Writ (C) 90 of 2016 as Annexure P-15

(pages from 127 to 128); Annexure P-21



(pages from 157 to 158) and Annexure P-

25 (pages from 159 to 160).

OO. BECAUSE the Hon’ble Patna High

Court and Ld. SDJM, Shri Nitin Kaushik,

Ld. Court No.16, Ld. CJM Division at

Begusarai has totally overlooked the RTI

application of the petitioner and did

not dispose of the frivolous Criminal

Case Complaint (P) No.5591 of 2013 u/s

498A on 26.08.2016 and extended the next

date of hearing on 01.10.2016 which has

resulted in failure of justice putting

life or personal liberty at stake and

freedom of movement across the Indian

Territory on hold and infringed the

fundamental right of the petitioner and

his old age ailing mother under Article

21 of the Constitution of India.

PP. BECAUSE all the interlinked

petitions filed by the petitioner vide

SLP(C) no. 9854/2012, SLP(C) no.

9483/2013, SLP(C) no. 19073/2013, Writ

(C) 90 of 2016, Writ (Crl.) 136 of 2016,

Review (Crl.) 825 of 2016 have been

dismissed by this Hon’ble Court while

Curative (Crl.) vide diary no. 41026 has

been notified defective without a

certificate by Sr. Advocate; which has

resulted in miscarriage of justice and

has resulted in encouraging the

respondents and their associates to

affect the administration of Justice

across the Indian Territory infringing

the fundamental rights of petitioner

no.01 and 02 under Article 21 of the

constitution of India.

PAST PRECEDENT IN SAFEGUARDING AND UPHOLDING

CONSTITUTIONAL PRINCIPLES AND FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS:

QUANTUM OF AFFECTED PERSON AS GROUND FOR UPHOLDING

CONSTITUTIONALITY

It is submitted that the following past

precedents as ground to safeguard the

fundamental rights of the petitioner and to

uphold the constitutional principles:

a. BECAUSE this Hon’ble Court has

held in the case of RK Dalmia vs Justice SR

Tendolkar [AIR 1958 SC 538](noted by this

Hon’ble Court in the impugned judgment) that:

“….a law may be constitutional even though

it relates to a single individual if, on

account of some special circumstances or

reasons applicable to him and not

applicable to others, that single

individual may be treated as a class by

himself”

b. The aforementioned principle has

inter alia been followed by a bench of this

Hon’ble Court in Ashok Thakur vs Union of India

[2008)6 SCC 1], wherein the court held that

even when it notices that “…..even one

individual’s freedom has been curtailed, this

court is duty-bound to entertain his or her

claim.” It humbly submitted to apply this

principle to the Petitioner no.01 & 02 affected

by the malfunctioning of the state apparatus

down the line.

c. BECAUSE the justice delivery

system of the country is such that in spite of

noticing a breach of public interest with a

corresponding social ramification, court

maintains delightful silence. However, this

Hon’ble Court has never maintained a

delightful silence with a blind eye and deaf

ear to the cry of a society in general or even

that of a litigant on the ground of finality

of an Order as passed by this Hon’ble Court.

d. BECAUSE the Order dated 21.10.2016

and 01.12.2016 of this Hon’ble Court implies a

closed door of this Hon’ble Court for the

petitioner and depicts that the same stands in

violation of natural justice adversely and

seriously affecting the rights of the

petitioner or the same depicts manifest

injustice rendering the order a mockery of

justice which causes insurmountable difficulty

and immense public injury. Hence, the

principle of concept of justice, ex debito

justitiae may play a pivotal role in this Writ

petition criminal.

e. BECAUSE the present Writ petition

is being filed to avoid grave miscarriage of

justice to millions of Senior Citizen Women in-

Laws who have been victimized and aggrieved by

the act of the Registry of this Hon’ble Court

and subsequent order dated 26.08.2016 by CJM

division Begusarai Bihar, Order dated

21.10.2016 and 01.12.2016 of this Hon’ble Court

and have been put on risk of rampant atrocities

by the malfunctioning of State Apparatus after

the closure of the matter by the Hon’ble High

Court of Delhi, upon rampant misuse of 498A

across India.

4. AVERMENT

i) That the Petitioner does not have any

alternative and efficacious remedy for

enforcement of his fundamental rights.

ii) That the present petitioner has filed

Writ (C)90 of 2016 and Writ(Crl.) 136 of 2016

petition before the Hon’ble Supreme Court of

India on the interlinked subject matter of the

present petition under different cause of

actions and under different cause title.

-:PRAYER:-

In the above premises, it is prayed that this

Hon'ble Court may be pleased:

(i) To issue a writ of prohibition or

Certiorari or other appropriate

writ order or direction directing

respondent No.04 and 05 for

cancellation of N.B.W dated

08.09.2011 process u/s 83 Cr.Pc.

against Shri Om Prakash Poddar and

Ms Asha Devi and quashing of the

pending criminal proceedings in

Criminal Case Complaint (P) No.5591

of 2013 u/s 498A to ensure life or

personal liberty and freedom of

movement across the Indian Territory

by the petitioner no.01 and 02.

(ii) To issue a writ of Certiorari or

other appropriate writ order or

direction directing respondent No.04

to issue an order of dismissal and

imprisonment against the concerned

Magistrate and Women Protection

officer for an offence of perjury

and illegal confinement of the

petitioner no.01 and 02.

(iii) To issue a writ of mandamus or


direction directing respondent No.

01 and 03 for enforcement of the

Fundamental Rights under Article 21

to initiate appropriate action and

pass necessary directions to prevent

such incidence of misuse of

Government Machinery against

consistent planting of criminal

conspiracy against the vulnerable

petitioner no.01 and 02 as the

petitioner no.01 has been left with

only one member in his family now,

after an untimely demise of his

father in the similar fashion.

(iv) To issue a writ of prohibition or



to prevent violation of the set

practice, procedures and rules as

laid down in the Handbook of the

Hon’ble Supreme Court of India to

achieve the UN goal of access to

justice for all.

(v) To issue a writ of mandamus or



and 06 to issue a dismissal order

against Women Protection Officer, Ms

Veena Kumari and to cancel the

registration no. 836/1991 of her

husband Advocate Gopal kumar

registered under Bihar State Bar

Council for an offence of perjury

and to issue an order against them

to pay the amount of Rs. 50 lakh to

the petitioner no.01 and 02 as a

compensation for causing them

irreparable damage, loss and illegal

confinement.

(vi) To issue a writ of mandamus or



to issue dismissal order against

respondent no.07 for an offence of

perjury.

(vii) To issue a writ of mandamus or



to pay the amount of Rs. 50 lakh to

the petitioner no.01 and 02 as a

compensation for keeping them

captive and house arrest illegally

and causing them irreparable damage

and loss.

(viii) To issue a writ of mandamus or



to issue order of removal against

Legal Aid Advocates from the

empanelment of Legal Aid

Institutions who were associated

with the case of petitioner from

Trial Court to High Court of Delhi

to Supreme Court of India and

eventually for their direct and

indirect denial to render Legal Aid

services to the petitioner.

(ix) To issue a writ of mandamus or



to bring necessary amendments in the

Constitution and respective

legislations; resulting out of the

interpretation of the Constitution

in this case.

(x) To pass such other orders and

further orders as may be deemed

necessary on the facts and in the

circumstances of the case.

FOR WHICH ACT OF KINDNESS, THE PETITIONER

SHALL AS INDUTY BOUND, EVER PRAY.

DRAWN & FILED BY:

PETITIONER IN PERSON

OM PRAKASH

NEW DELHI:

FILED ON : .01.2017.

Settled by: Petitioner




WITH


WITH


IN THE MATTER OF:

OM PRAKASH & ANR ..PETITIONER

VERSUS

UNION OF INDIA & ORS …….RESPONDENT

AFFIDAVIT

I, Om Prakash S/o Late Deep Narayan Poddar, aged 42

years, R/o RZF/893, Netaji Subash Marg, Raj Nagar

Part-II, Palam Colony, New Delhi - 77, do hereby

solemnly affirm and state on oath as under:-

1. That I am the Petitioner in the above matter

and well conversant with the facts of the case

as such competent to swear this affidavit.

2. That the contents of the accompanying Writ

Petition Criminal [para 1 to 04.], [Page 01 to

276] and Synopsis and List of Dates (Page B to

P’], and I, As. having understood the contents

thereof I say that the facts state therein are

correct which are based on the official record.

3. That the Writ Petition Criminal Paper Book

contains total 276 pages.’

4. That the annexures are true copies of their

respective originals.

DEPONENT

VERIFICATION:

I, the above-named deponent do hereby verify that

the facts stated in the above affidavit are true to

my knowledge and belief. No part of the same is

false and nothing material has been concealed

therefrom.

Verified at New Delhi on this the 18th

day of

January, 2017.

DEPONENT

Annexure P-1

Date: 03.03.2016

To,

The Superintendent of Police (SP)

Katihar, Bihar

Sub: Complaint against installation of Public tube

well inside the house premise of Widow Asha Rani

Devi & Mr. Om Prakash Poddar, R/O Shukkar Hatt,

Durga Sthan, Sonaili, Kadwa, Katihar without their

information by Mr. Bihari Lal Bubna, Mukhiya,

Kantiya Panchayat.

Sir,

Complainant is S/O Late Sh. Deep Narayan Poddar,

the permanent resident of Shukkar Hatt, Durga

Sthan, Sonaili, Kadwa, Katihar, Bihar-855114.

Complainant is presently residing in New Delhi.

Complainant came to know that his house has been

ransomed and Mr. Bihari Lal Bubna, Mukhiya of

Kantiya Panchayat has installed a public tube well

inside the premises of Complainant's resident

without his prior permission.

On the ground of this information I telephoned

(09431284332) to Mr. Bihari Lal Bubna, Mukhiya of

Kantiya, Sonaili, Kadwa, Katihar at 9:38 AM on

03.03.2016.

In response to the telephone call, Mr. Bubna took

the responsibility of the above mentioned work.

When I asked why he did not take prior permission

from the owner of that property, Mrs. Asha Rani

Devi and her son Mr. Om Prakash Poddar; he replied

that he does not take permission for this petty

thing and he has installed this public tube well

for the public cause. When I asked that on what

ground Mukhiya can take this decision to install a

public tube well inside the premises of private

property without the consent of owner of that

property, he replied that he has got discretion to

do so. He also fearlessly asked me to complaint

against him to SP, Katihar, as police is his

political master.

His other family members, Mr. Vishwanath Bubna,

Shyamar Bubna and Bunty Bubna (Petrol Pump Owner)

are already on your record, vide complaint dated

07.04.2011, dated 16.07.2011, dated 03.08.2011,

dated 29.09.2011, dated 31.12,2012. They have

killed my handicapped father in 2007.

Since 2004, these Bubna families are behind my

family as per the previous police record.

Complaint has already been faxed and emailed to

S.P. Katihar on 03.03.2016.

Kindly take the cognizance of this criminal offence

as Mr. Bubna is planning to usurp my property.

With Best Regards,

Om Prakash Poddar

Complainant

RZF-893, Netaji Subhash Marg,

Raj Nagar, Part-2

Palam Colony, New Delhi-110077

Mob: 9968337815

E-mail:[email protected]

Annexure: P-2

POSTER WITH TEXT “TOILET FOR FEMALES” PASTED AT THE

ENTRY GATE OF HOUSE PORTION

POSTER WITH TEXT “TOILET FOR MALES” HANGED IN THE

MIDDLE OF HOUSE PORTION

TUBE

BO INSTTALLATION OF TUBE-WELL WITHOUT PERMISSION OF

PETITIONER NO.02 BY ELECTED PRI LEADER WITH THE

CONSENT OF SP KATIHAR W.E.F 28.02.2016 TO

05.03.2016

PUBLIC TUBE-WELL PORTION

DAMAGE OF COCONUNT TREE PORTION

PUBLIC TOILET FOR FEMALE PORTION

BELOW LINK IS THE ROAD MAP OF JUDICIAL

MALFUNCTIONING

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/state-apparatus-

involved-killing-conman-man-india-om-prakash-

poddar?trk=prof-post

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/state-apparatus-involved-killing-conman-man-india-om-prakash-poddar?trk=prof-post



ANNEXURE P-3

Letter No. 358/J.SHI.KO

OFFFICE OF SUPRENTENDENT OF POLICE, KATIHAR

From,

Superintendent of Police,

Katihar

To,

In-charge

Janta Darbar Cell

Police Head Quarter

Bihar, Patna

Katihar dated 07.05.2016

Ref: Your letter no.80/J.SHI.KO(PU.MU.)dated

28.03.2016 and reference to 999990303160113

Sub: Copy of investigation inquiry report against

application of applicant Om Prakash Poddar S/O Late

Shri Deep Narayan Poddar R/O Asha Deep Niwas,

Shukkar Hatt, Sonaili, P.S. Kadwa, Distt-Katihar-

reg.

Sir,

Application of applicant Om Prakash Poddar S/O Late

Shri Deep Narayan Poddar R/O Asha Deep Niwas,

Shukkar Hatt, Sonaili, P.S. Kadwa, Distt-Katihar is

being investigated by DSP Barsoi. After the

competition of investigation conducted by DSP

Barsoi, a copy of inquiry report received from DSP

Barsoi vide letter no. 874/16 dated 02.05.2016

which is self-explanatory. A copy of inquiry report

is sending for your perusal.

Enclosure: As above

Yours faithfully

SP Katihar

Copy to:-

A copy of inquiry report to In-charge PS Kadwa for

information and necessary action please. He should

supply the copy of inquiry report to the applicant

with receipt of the same.

File No.874/16 DSP OFFICE BARSOI

Katihar dated 02.05.2016

To,

SP Katihar

Ref: Office of SP File No.997/J.SHI.KO dated

09.04.2016, File No.1095/ J.SHI.KO dated 20.04.2016

and In-charge Janta Darbar Cell, Police Head

Quarter, Bihar, Patna vide letter no.

80/J.SHI.KO(PU.MU.) dated 28.03.2016 and reference

no. 999990303160113

Sub: Inquiry of application of applicant Om Prakash

Poddar S/O Late Shri Deep Narayan Poddar R/O Asha

Deep Niwas Shukkar Haat Sonaili P.S. Kadwa District

Katihar-reg.

Sir,

Application of applicant with reference to the

above mentioned reference and subject has been

received. He has alleged in his application for

breaking of entry gate of his house by Mr. Bihari

Lal Bubna, installation of toilets for male and

female, installation of tube-well, damage of

coconut tree without permission, religious

gathering “Bhagwat” w.e.f 28.02.2016 to 05.03.2016

in front of his house.

Allegations have been inquired on the spot on

17.04.2016.

Applicant Om Prakash Poddar S/O Late Shri Deep

Narayan Poddar R/O Asha Deep Niwas, Shukkar Haat,

Durga Sthan, PS Kadwa District Katihar is residing

in Delhi.

Pappu Poddar S/O Shri Ramanand Poddar R/O Shukkar

Haat, Sonaili, PS Kadwa, District Katihar stated

that Om Prakash Poddar alias Pappu Poddar S/O Late

Shri Deep Narayan Poddar R/O Shukkar Haat Durga

Sthan is working with NGO in Delhi. He has gone

Delhi before six months. No body stays at home.

House is locked, no one stays here. Allegations are

out of without any dispute. It is true that Durga

Mandir is nearby his house. Religious ‘Geetha

Speech’ was organized publically. Entry of the

House is without gate. Some male and females were

entering into the premises for washing hands at the

tub well considering it an empty place. Premises of

the house was empty therefore tube-well being

installed with the permission of his maternal uncle

which had been uninstalled after the finish of the

religious function. Coconut tree is old which is

still there.

Pramod Poddar, age 45 years, S/O Late Deep Lal

Poddar R/O Shukkar Haat, Sonaili 02. Kishore Gupta

age 38 years S/O Shri Kishun Prasad Gupta 03.

Chhottu Kumar Sahni age 28 years S/O Late Seeya Lal

Sahni 04. Anil Gupta Sahni S/O Shri Suresh Sahni

05.Vijay Sahni S/O Late Fagu Sahni 06. Being

interacted and examined separately and recorded

their statement that w.e.f 28.02.2016 to 05.03.2016

a religious function called “Bhagwat” was going on

in front of Durga Sthan. Only tube-well was

installed at the empty places due to gateless entry

of the house with the permission of Shri Leelanand

Poddar maternal uncle of Om Prakash Poddar during

the period of religious functions and was

uninstalled after the end of the religious

functions. There are no damage other than this.

Allegations have been exaggerated in the

application.

Find enclosed the application of the applicant.

Submitted for your information please.

Enclosure: As above

(Chandrika Prasad)

DSP Barsoi, Katihar

Annexure: P-4

Complaint Number [999990303160113]

Received At Office: CMSEC / CM SECRETARIAT

Currently At Office: SP KATIHAR

Status: Pending

Department: Home

Petition History

CMSEC:

Status : Pending

Date: 20160304

Reply: The responsible authority is hereby

requested to look into the matter and do needful.

Deadline set for is 14 days.

Status: Disposed

Date: 20160507

Reply: inquiry report

File uploaded in this reply is 0303160113.pdf

CMSEC:

Status: Pending

Date: 20160517

Rejoinder:

Dissatisfaction with Complaint is registered on pub

lic site at 20160517T12:24:55+05:30 from IP Addre

ss 106.67.107.100.

Comments Entered:

Police report is fabricated and false. Witnesses ar

e influenced.

The posters with text Toilets for female at the ent

ry gate and posters withtext Toilets for male in th

e middle of the building were pasted.

I have not authorized anyone as a local guardian fo

r the building. I havenot handed over my house key

to anyone. How can anyone give permissionexcept me.

Mukhiya is my neighbor just 3 house besideds my hou

se. He

knows everything that I am reeling under criminal c

onspiracy since 12years. Out of that I have lost my

father untimely in 2007. Mukhiya knowsthat I have n

ot given my house key to anyone. He has admitted ov

ertelephone on 03.03.2016. Hence, police has protec

ted the heinous act andcriminal trespass of Mukhiya

Bihari lal bubna.

Witnesses have been influenced and bought.

I have got the material evidence of photographs aga

inst my complaints andallegations which has been se

nt by the villagers on 05.03.2016.

Coconut tree has been damaged it is evident. But Po

lice says nothing hasbeen done. Police report says

complaint has been exaggerated by thecomplainant.

Absolutely false and fabricated report by the polic

e because it has beendone with the consent of polic

e.

There was heavy deployment of police in front of my

house which happensto be the venue of the religiou

s functions and gathering. It was more than10 lakhs

budgeted programme for 7 days.

I have faxed the complaint to SP Katihar on 03.03.2

016 but he did notorder for removal of the posters

and public toilets till 06.03.2016.

The photographs have been sent dated 5th and 6th Ma

rch by the villagersthrough Whatts up.

On the ground of this material evidence I had made

SP Katihar as a partybefore Supreme Court of India

in WRIT CIVIL 90 OF 2016.

Reply:

Document Size Date

0303160113.pdf 410360 20160507 17:01:58

Annexure: P-5

ABOVE THE KNEE AMPUTEE HEADMASTER FATHER OF THE

PETITIONER NO.01 IN THIS WRIT PETITION CRIMINAL WHO

HAS BEEN ENCIRCLED TO DEATH BY THE NEXUS OF MAFIA

AND STATE APPARATUS IN 2007 UNTIMELY

LATE SHRI DEEP NARAYAN PODDAR

(1939-2007)& (VICTIM NO.01)

OXYGEN DEPENDENT WIDOW ASHA RANI DEVI (1946-TILL

DATE)& WIFE OF LATE SHRI DEEP NARAYAN PODDAR &

PETITIONER NO.02 IN THIS WRIT PETITION CRIMINAL WHO

HAS BEEN ENCIRCLED IN THE SAME FASHION BY THE STATE

APPRATUS & (VICTIM NO.02)

VICTIM NO.02

VICTIM NO.02

VICTIM NO.02

HOME OXYGEN MACHINE ON RENT

Annexure: P-6


COURT COMPLAINT AGAINST CJM COURT, DISTRICT

BEGUSARAI IN BIHAR

CASE.No. 9P/2010 & 5591/2013

IN THE MATTER OF:

RINA KUMARI …………COMPLAINANT

VERSUS

1. OM PRAKASH PODDAR

2. WIDOW ASHA RANI DEVI ….RESPONDENT

POSITION OF THE PARITES

BEFORE THE CJM COURT OF DISTRICT COURT AT

BEGUSARAI, BIHAR.

N.D.O.H:26.08.2016

BETWEEN

RINA KUMARI ………COMPLAINANT

D/O Surender Narayan Poddar

R/O RC Marketing Division

Indian Oil Corporation

Barauni Refinery,

P.S Barauni, Distt. Begusarai

Bihar

VERSUES

8. Shri Om Prakash Poddar …….RESPONDENT NO.01


R/O RZF-893, Netaji Subhash Marg

Raj Nagar Part-2, Palam Colony

New Delhi-110077

9. Widow Asha Rani Devi …….RESPONDENT NO.02

M/o Om Prakash Poddar

Asha Deep Niwas

Shukkar Haat, Durga Mandir

Vill-Sonaili, P.S. Kadwa

Distt. Katihar, Bihar-855114

APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 340 OF CODE OF CRIMINAL

PROCEDURE, 1973 AGAINST OFFENCES AFFECTING THE

ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE

To

The Hon'ble Chief Justice of India,

Supreme Court of India.

The court complaint Petition of the

respondent most respectfully showeth :-

1. That the respondent has won the

case No. MAT. APP. 7/2012 by the High Court of

Delhi on the ground of certified copies of

Begusarai Court vide Case No.9P/2010 filed

against case no. HMA-700/2010 at Trial Court,

Dwarka Court at New Delhi.

2. That the complainant has appeared before Trial

Court in case no. HMA-700/2010 on 09.02.2011

and supplied the certified copy of case no.

9P/2010 and did not supply the copy of criminal

case no. 397C/ 2011 u/s 498A/323 of IPC and u/s

3/4 of D.P Act which converted into new CIS no.

5591/2013 filing date 7.2.2011 and first

hearing date 05.12.2013 and managed to continue

to take court dates since 7.2.2011 to till date

without the knowledge of respondents and did

not file written statement (WS) before Trial

Court at New Delhi and did not join High Court

of Delhi in case no. MAT. APPL. 7/2012 even

after receipt of service Notice which is on the

Supreme Court Record with SLP(C) no.

19073/2013.

3. That it is also on the Supreme Court Record

with SLP(C) no. 9854/2012, SLP(C) no.

9483/2013, SLP(C) no. 19073/2013 and Writ (C)

90 of 2016.

4. That respondent sought information on 01.03.

2016 against updation of case Status/Judgment

Data against case no. 9P/2010 through system

officer Begusarai under the intimation of

cpc[email protected] and [email protected].

mailto:cpc[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

5. That the information sought by the respondent

against case no. 9P/2010 and information

supplied by the Begusarai district court on

01.03.2016 against the complaint case no.

397C/2011 New CIS generated computerized

no.5591/2013, filing no.11329/2013, filing date

07.02.2011, registration no.5591/2013,

registration date 07.02.2011, case code

214200113292013 and first hearing date

05.12.2013.

6. That it also violates the directions of Hon’ble

Supreme Court which has been laid down in the

case of Arnesh Kumar Vs State of Bihar in Cr

APP No. 1277 of 2014.

7. That the matter pertains to life or personal

liberty and freedom of movement across the

Indian Territory by the respondent no.01 and

02. It is needless to say here that for the

first time, this year; the respondents being

compelled to cancel their routine annual home

visit on the eve of Durga Puja.

QUESTION OF LAWS ARISES AGAINST CJM COURT:

1. Why notice of appearance not being served on

the accused within two weeks from the date of

institutions of case on 07.02.2011?

2. Why Magistrate did not order for arrest of the

accused since 5 years from the institutions of

case on 07.02.2011 to till date?

3. Why accused not being charge sheeted since 5

years from the institutions of case on

07.02.2011 to till date?

4. Why date of first hearing has been fixed on

05.12.2013 after two and half years of

institution of case on 07.02.2011?

5. Why district court Begusarai supplied the

information against case no 5591/2013 while

the information was sought by the respondent

against the case no 9P/2010?

6. What is the correlation between case no.

9P/2010 and Case No.5591/2013?

7. Why Magistrate did not take the cognizance of

replication and cancellation of NBW filed by

the respondent against the case no.9P/2010

through his advocate on 03.03.2011 wherein it

has been clearly mentioned that the

complainant has appeared before the Trial

Court in case no HMA-700/2010 at New Delhi and

has intentionally concealed this material fact

from this court?

8. Why Magistrate did not order/direct the

complainant to pursue the HMA-700/2010 where

she has already appeared on 09.02.2011 at New

Delhi because the jurisdiction of the case

falls within the South West district of Delhi?

9. Why no FIR, no written statement (WS) by the

client of women protection officer before the

Trial Court at New Delhi, no appearance by the


High Court of Delhi, yet frivolous criminal

cases are continuing for the same cause of

action in another state even after the

settlement by the High Court of Delhi in the

case No. MAT. APPL. 7/2012 on 23.07.2013?

QUESTION OF LAWS ARISES AGAINST WOMEN PROTECTION

OFFICER & HER ADVOCATE HUSBAND GOPAL KUMAR:

1. On what ground women protection officer filed

frivolous criminal case no. 9P/2010 and case

no. 5591/2013 without police diary after a gap

of 6 years from the date of occurrence on 24th

June 2004?

2. On what ground the husband of women protection

officer, Advocate Gopal Kumar, district court

Begusarai (Reg. No. 836/1991) managed to get

issued a frivolous NBW through SP Begusarai

against the respondent no.01 and his ailing

mother after a gap of 6 years which has

resulted in finishing their whole family life?

3. Why the client of protection officer concealed

the material fact from the Begusarai Court that

she is already in receipt of Notice against case

no. 700/2010 of HMA by Dwarka Court at New Delhi

which is evident from the order sheet dated

18.11.2010, 23.12.2010 and 13.01.2011 of

Begusarai Court in case no. 9P/2010?

4. Why the client of protection officer concealed

the material fact from the Begusarai Court that

she has appeared against case no. 700/2010 of HMA

before Dwarka Court at New Delhi on 09.02.2011

which is evident from the order sheet dated

22.02.2011 of Begusarai Court in case no.

9P/2010?

5. Why the client of protection officer appeared

against case no. 700/2010 of HMA before Dwarka

Court at New Delhi on 09.02.2011 after filing

criminal case no. 397C/ 2011 on 7.2.2011 u/s 498A

which converted into new CIS no. 5591/2013?

6. Why the client of women protection officer who

appeared before Trial Court at New Delhi in case

no. HMA-700/2010 on 09.02.2011 supplied the copy

of case no.9P/2010 and did not supply the copy of

criminal case no. 397C/ 2011 which was concealed

intentionally, which converted into new CIS no.

5591/2013 filing date 7.2.2011 and managed to

continue to take court dates since 7.2.2011 to

till date without the knowledge of respondents

and did not file written statement (WS) before

Trial Court at New Delhi and did not join High

Court of Delhi in case no. MAT. APPL. 7/2012 even

after receipt of service Notice which is on the

Supreme Court Record with SLP(C) no. 19073/2013.

7. What is the correlation between case no. 9P/2010

and Case No. 97C/ 2011 converted into new CIS no.

5591/2013?

8. Why no FIR, no written statement (WS) by the


Trial Court at New Delhi, no appearance by the


High Court of Delhi, yet frivolous criminal cases

are continuing for the same cause of action in

another state even after the settlement by the

High Court of Delhi in the case No. MAT. APPL.

7/2012 on 23.07.2013?

9. What departmental action has been taken against

the women protection officer Ms. Veena Kumari and

her husband, Advocate Mr. Gopal Kumar (Reg. No.

836/1991) for instituting frivolous litigations

Case no. 9P/2010 & 5591/2013 before CJM Court

Begusarai and managed to get issued frivolous NBW

dated 25.08.2010 against the respondent and his

ailing mother and sustaining criminal conspiracy

since 6 years against respondent no.01 and his

ailing mother to plunder their family life

permanently to an end; so far?

-:PRAYER:-

It is therefore, most respectfully prayed

that the Hon'ble Chief Justice of India

may please to:-

i. Take the cognizance for criminal

conspiracy under sections 340 of CrPc

against the CJM Court, women

protection officer, Begusarai, Ms

Veena Kumari and her husband, Advocate

Mr. Gopal Kumar, Reg. No. 836/1991

against offences affecting the

administration of Justice and

sustaining frivolous criminal case

against respondent no.01 and 02 and to

ensure the life or personal liberty

and freedom of movement across the

Indian Territory by the respondent

no.01 and 02.

ii. Pass any other further

orders/directions, which this Hon’ble

Court may deem fit and proper in the

facts and circumstances of the

complaint against the CJM court

Begusarai, and women protection

officer, Begusarai, Ms Veena Kumari

and her husband, Advocate Gopal Kumar

Reg. No. 836/1991, district court

Begusarai and in favor of the

respondent no.01 and 02.

DRAWN & FILED BY:

RESPONDENT IN PERSON

NEW DELHI: OM PRAKASH

FILED ON : 19.08.2016

Annexure: P-7

Annexure: P-8



CRIMINAL WRIT PETITON NO. 136 OF 2016

BETWEEN

3. Om Prakash ………PETITIONER NO.01


R/O RZF-893, Netaji Sbhash Marg

Raj Nagar Part-2,

Palam Colony

New Delhi-110077

4. Widow Asha Devi ……PETITIONER NO.02

W/o Late Sh. Deep Narayan Poddar

R/O ASHA DEEP NIWAS

Vill-Kantiya Panchayat,

Shukkar Haat Sonaili,

In front of Durga Mandir

P.S. Kadwa, Distt-Katihar

Bihar-855114

VERSUES

10. State of Bihar ….RESPONDENT No.01

Through Chief Secretary,

Old Secretariat, Patna-800015

11. The Hon’ble Patna ….RESPONDENT No.02

High Court,

Through

Hon’ble Registrar General,

Patna High Court

Patna-800028

12. Ld. CJM Court ….RESPONDENT No.03

Through Ld. CJM

Begusarai, Bihar

Civil Court, Ld. CJM Division

at Begusarai, Bihar

13. The Secretary ….RESPONDENT No.04

Cum-Legal Remembrancer

Law Department, Government of Bihar

Main Secretariat Patna-800015

APPLICATION BEFORE THE HON’BLE CHIEF

JUSTICE OF INDIA FOR MENTIONING OF

FRESH MATTER URGENT LISTING EARLIER

THAN THE SCHEDULED DATE AND URGENT

RELIEF IS SOUGHT AGAINST WRIT PETITION

CRIMINAL 136 OF 2016.

To




application of the Petitioner abovenamed.


GROUNDS FOR URGENT LISTING

1. That the petitioner has filed the Writ Petition

Criminal 136 of 2016 on 30.08.2016 and the

matter has got registered on 22.09.2016 and the

same is pending for listing.

2. That the matter pertains to the main subject

categories of criminal matter vide code no. 14

and sub category of matter for quashing of

criminal proceedings vide code no. 1429.

3. That N.B.W dated 08.09.2011 process u/s 83

Cr.Pc. in 498A Criminal Case Complaint (P)

No.5591 of 2013 has been issued by the Ld. CJM

Division Begusarai under the Judicature of

Hon’ble Patna High Court against petitioner

no.01 and petitioner no.02 without the

knowledge of petitioners and after the

settlement of the matter on the ground of

certified copy of domestic violence case no. 9P

of 2010 of Ld. CJM Court Begusarai by the

Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in MAT. APPL. NO. 7

of 2012 on 23.07.2013; which has been disclosed

by the Ld. CJM, Begusarai through RTI dated

27.08.2016.

4. That the petitioner no.02 is Senior Citizen

oxygen dependent widow women.

5. That the matter is interlinked with old matters

of this Hon’ble Court vide SLP(C) no.

9854/2012, SLP(C) no. 9483/2013, SLP(C) no.

19073/2013 and Writ (C) 90 of 2016.

6. That the matter is also interlinked with

harassment of OBC and senior citizen oxygen

dependent widow women petitioner no.02.

7. That the matter is also interlinked with the

Prevention of Corruption.

8. That the matter is short matter.

9. That the life or personal liberty of the

petitioner no.01 and petitioner no.02 is at

stake.

10. That for the first time, this year; the

petitioner no.01 and 02 is being compelled to

cancel their routine annual home visit on the

eve of Durga Puja.

11. That petitioner no. 02 has filed an

application for seeking permission to grant

special power of Attorney to petitioner no.01

to appear and argue the Writ petition

(Criminal) no. 136 of 2016 on behalf of

petitioner no.02 on 29.09.2016.

12. That petitioner no.02 is an oxygen

dependent COPD patient and undergoing treatment

with AIIMS at New Delhi which is on the Hon’ble

Supreme Court Record with SLP(C) no. 9854/2012,

SLP(C) no. 9483/2013 and SLP(C) no. 19073/2013,

therefore she is unable to attend the

proceedings of this Hon’ble Court.

13. That the urgent relief is sought for

cancellation of N.B.W process u/s 83 Cr.Pc.

dated 08.09.2011 issued against petitioner

no.01 and petitioner no.02 and quashing of

criminal proceedings u/s 498A in Criminal Case

Complaint (P) No.5591 of 2013 pending before

the Ld. CJM Division Begusarai under the

Judicature of Hon’ble Patna High Court against

petitioner no.01 and petitioner no.02.

14. That petitioner no.01 and petitioner no.02

is putting up the matter for urgent listing

before the Hon’ble Chief Justice of India.

-:PRAYER:-



(xi) To order for urgent listing of Writ

petition Criminal 136 of 2016 on

priority basis.

(xii) To pass such other orders and






DRAWN & FILED BY:

PETITIONER NO.01 IN PERSON

OM PRAKASH

NEW DELHI:

FILED ON :03.10.2016.




IN THE MATTER OF:


VERSUS

STATE OF BIHAR & ORS …….RESPONDENT

AFFIDAVIT

I, Om Prakash S/o Late Shri Deep Narayan Poddar,

aged about 43 years, R/o RZF-893, Netaji Subhash

Marg, Raj Nagar Part-2, Palam Colony, New Delhi-

110077, do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath

as under:-

1. That I am the Petitioner no.01 in the above

matter and well conversant with the facts of

the case as such competent to swear this

affidavit.

2. That the contents of the accompanying

application Under Section 151 C.P.C. for

mentioning of fresh matter listing earlier than

the scheduled date and urgent relief is sought

against Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 136 of

2016 before the Hon’ble Chief Justice of India,

which has been drafted by me [para 01 to 14.],

[Page 01 to 09] and I, As. and having

understood the contents thereof I say that the

facts state therein are correct which are based

on the official record.

3. That the accompanying application Under Section

151 C.P.C. for urgent listing of matter totals

09 pages.’

DEPONENT

VERIFICATION:





therefrom.

Verified at New Delhi on this the 3rd day of

October,2016.

DEPONENT

Annexure: P-11


LETTER-PETITION AGAINST RAMPANT ATROCITIES ON

SENIOR CITIZEN, OXYGEN DEPENDENT, UNEDUCATED,

OBC, VOICELESS RURAL WOMAN.

To

Hon'ble the Chief Justice of India. The

Humble Letter-Petition of the Petitioner

Widow Asha Rani Devi.


15. That the petitioner is Widow Asha Devi,

aged about 71 years, wife of Late Shri Deep

Narayan Poddar, a Head Master with Government

of Bihar residing at ASHA DEEP NIWAS, Vill-

Kantiya Panchayat, Shukkar Haat, Sonaili,

in front of Durga Mandir, P.S. Kadwa,

Distt-Katihar, Bihar-855114 being

petitioner no.02 in Writ Petition

(Criminal) 136 of 2016 before this Hon’ble

Court.

16. That the petitioner had applied for

urgent mentioning of the matter before

Hon’ble the Chief Justice of India through

Mentioning officer of this Hon’ble Court

without routing through the registry on the













17. That the Mentioning officer initially

returned the URGENT mentioning application

of the petitioner on 06.10.2016 as it does

not qualify the ground for urgency to

mention before Hon’ble the Chief Justice of

India. Mentioning officer asked very

surprising question from the petitioner.

Why have you not executed the N.B.W so far?

How did you know about N.B.W.? How it came

into your mind to file RTI against Ld. CJM

Begusarai?

18. That the Mentioning officer then

consulted Registrar and reverted back after

1 and half hour and took back the urgent

mentioning application of the petitioner in

the evening of 06.10.2016 and directed the

petitioner to check the evening mentioning

cause list for 07.10.2016.

19. Hence the Court No.06 was allocated for

mentioning instead of Hon’ble the Chief Justice

of India’s Court.

20. That the Mentioning officer of this

Hon’ble Court has intentionally routed my

urgent mentioning application through

registry in the evening of 06.10.2016

despite of my protest to directly allow me

for mentioning before Hon’ble the Chief

Justice of India as per the provisions laid


21. Hence, the petitioner is aggrieved by the

intentional act of Mentioning officer to list

the matter before the Court No.06 as the same

Hon’ble bench of this Court No.06 has dismissed

the Writ (C) 90 of 2016, although the






22. That the petitioner has submitted before

the Hon’ble Court No.06 to grant me liberty to

mention the matter before Hon’ble the Chief

Justice of India’s Court. Hence, order dated

07.10.2016 has been passed by the Hon’ble Court

No. 06 in Writ (Crl.) 136 of 2016.

23. That the petitioner is an uneducated, OBC,

voiceless rural woman, oxygen dependent, COPD

case, undergoing treatment with AIIMS at New

Delhi which is on the Hon’ble Supreme Court

Record with SLP(C) no. 9854/2012, SLP(C) no.

9483/2013 and SLP(C) no. 19073/2013.

24. That the petitioner had two members

nuclear family i.e. an above the knee amputee

diabetic Rtd. Head Master husband who was

passing urine and stool through catheter, an

unemployed single son completing his education

at New Delhi and herself.

25. That taking benefit out of the misery of

the petitioner, Mr. Surendra Narayan Poddar,

Assistant Manager, Marketing Division, RC,

Barauni Refinery Installation, Indian Oil

Corporation Ltd solemnized a fraudulent

marriage with misrepresentation of bride with

the petitioner’s single son at gun point on

24th June 2004.

26. That from the very first day of the

marriage, we protested publically but due to

persistent threats and pressure by Mr. Surendra

Narayan Poddar and his Mafia-local leader

nexus, we could not do anything between 2004

to 2010, even we were being stopped to lodge

F.I.R. against them and had to bear with the

consequences. It is on the record of Trial

Court at New Delhi in HMA-700 of 2010.

27. Petitioner or any family member of her has

never ever been to the residence of Mr.

Surendra Narayan Poddar and even does not know

the multiple residential addresses of Mr.

Surendra Narayan Poddar since 12 years. For the

first time she came to know the official

address of Mr. Surendra Narayan Poddar on

09.02.2011 when he supplied the proceedings of

Ld. Begusarai Court against case no. 9P of 2010

before the Ld. Trial Court at New Delhi.

28. That the son of the petitioner was busy in

saving the life of his handicapped father at

New Delhi and the daughter of Mr. Surendra

Narayan Poddar was residing at rented

accommodation of Mr. Pappu Yadav, a driver of

Hon’ble Judge in Palam Colony, Raj Nagar Part-2

at New Delhi. It has also been observed by the

Judgment of the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in

MAT. APPL No. 7 of 2012.

29. That Mr. Surendra Narayan Poddar took his

daughter back to Dhanbad, Bihar & Jharkhand

home on 15.04.2005 without our consent when we

needed a helping hand urgently, when the

handicapped husband of the petitioner was on

death bed, passing urine and stool through

catheters without any attendant at the top of

the roof of the slum/resettlement colony of

palam at New Delhi in the scorching heat of 47

degree Celsius and never returned back.

30. That the petitioner was residing at

Sonaili Bihar while the daughter of Mr.

Surendra Narayan Poddar was residing at Palam

New Delhi and left for her home on 15.04.2005

from Palam New Delhi which is on the record of

Ld. Trial Court at New Delhi and the Hon’ble

Supreme Court of India.

31. That Mr. Surendra Narayan Poddar and his

Mafia-National political leader nexus started

misusing state apparatus thereafter, since 2010

to till date.

32. That, two N.B.W has been issued by the

same Ld. CJM division Begusarai for the same

cause of action against the same accused on

different dates without F.I.R and police diary

after a gap of 5 years from the date of

occurrence. One N.B.W dated 25.08.2010 u/s 12

of domestic violence Act in Criminal Case

Complaint (P) No. 9P of 2010 and second N.B.W.

dated 08.09.2011 process u/s 83 Cr.Pc. in 498A

Criminal Case Complaint (P) No.5591 of 2013 has

been issued by the same Ld. CJM Division

Begusarai under the Judicature of Hon’ble Patna

High Court against the petitioner, wherein,

N.B.W dated 25.08.2010 is open and on the

record of Ld. Trial Court at New Delhi and the

Hon’ble Supreme Court of India while N.B.W

dated 08.09.2011 has been kept secret by the

Ld. CJM division Begusarai.

33. That by way of instituting frivolous

criminal complaint case u/s 498A and issuing

the frivolous N.B.W and keeping it secret from

the petitioner, the State Apparatus Sitting in

ambush to attack the petitioner at the time of

their own convenience OR to repeat the whole

Trial under the jurisdiction of Hon’ble Patna

High Court and to convert it into the criminal

Appeal by the petitioner OR to make it rare of

the rarest case by killing us in the similar

fashion as they had killed my diabetic above

the knee amputee handicapped husband in 2007 to

usurp my lifetime acquired property in Bihar.

34. GOD pushed us on 01.03.2016 to inquire

about the non-availability of case data against

Case No. 9P of 2010 at the website of e-court

services through System Officer District Court

Begusarai.

35. Upon inquiry, Ld. System Officer, District

court Begusarai supplied the information

against case no 5591/2013 u/s 498A while the

information was sought by us against the case

no 9P/2010 u/s 12 of Domestic violence Act

under the intimation of e-committee Supreme

Court and Patna High Court.

36. That the case has reached up to this stage

after 12 years through RTI against Ld.

Principal Judge Deepa Sharma of Trial Court at

New Delhi for stopping the whole court

proceedings on 30.05.2011 and generating the

wrong order sheet alleging the petitioner for

requesting for adjournment of the court

proceedings while the date was fixed for WS

filing by the respondent and subsequent RTI

reply dated 30.08.2011; RTI against Hon'ble

Justice Ms Veena Birbal of Hon'ble High Court

of Delhi for adjourning the court proceeding

while the Legal Aid Advocate Jai Bansal was

absent without the intimation to the petitioner

and the petitioner in person was present and

subsequent RTI reply dated 27.08.2012; CIC

decision order dated 25.09.2014 under the title

Om Prakash Poddar Vs Department of Legal

Affairs against Delhi State Legal Services

Authority for not taking any action against

Legal Aid Advocate; Department of Justice Govt

of India letter to NALSA dated 13.04.2015;

NALSA letter to Supreme Court Legal Service

Committee dated 13.05.2015; NALSA letter to

Delhi High Court Legal Service Committee dated

13.05.2015; NALSA letter to Delhi State Legal

Service Authority dated 13.05.2015 and RTI

against Ld. Shri Chandra Mohan Jha, CJM, Civil

Court Begusarai Bihar of Ld. CJM Divivsion

District Court Begusarai Bihar and subsequent

RTI reply dated 27.08.2016. It is on the record

of SLP(C) no. 9854/2012, SLP(C) no. 9483/2013,

SLP(C) no. 19073/2013 Writ (C) 90 of 2016 filed

by the petitioner before this Hon’ble Court.

37. That the Hon’ble Chief Minister of Bihar

Secretariat has found the online grievances no.

999990118071603221 & 999990118071603224 dated

18.07.2016 of us against Ld. CJM Court

Begusarai and Ms Veena Kumari, Women Protection

Officer, Begusarai under the negative list

and forwarded it to the Law Department,

Government of Bihar for requisite reply and

necessary action for redressal.

38. That Petitioner has filed a complaint

against Advocate Gopal Kumar Reg No.836/1991

and Advocate Dhirendra Prasad Reg. No. 963/1990

for instituting frivolous litigation after a

gap of 5 years from the date of occurrence and

issuing frivolous N.B.W dated 25.08.2010 &

08.09.2011 against petitioner for the same

cause of action against the same accused from

the same Ld. CJM Division Begusarai Bihar; for

presenting distorted picture of case history

before the Ld. CJM and obstructing the path of

Ld. CJM in right delivery of judgment and for

consistent planting of criminal conspiracy

against the Family Pension Bank Account of

petitioner before the Bihar State Bar Council

Patna on 02.05.2016.

39. That Chief Judicial Magistrate Cum Public

Information Officer District Court Begusarai

Bihar has furnished false and frivolous reply

on 27.08.2016.

40. That Certified Copy of Order dated 4th

April 2011 issued by District Court Begusarai

Bihar which falsifies the RTI reply under

QUESTION NO.07 by Chief Judicial Magistrate Cum

Public Information Officer District Court

Begusarai Bihar.

41. The RTI reply of Ld. Chief Judicial

Magistrate Cum Public Information Officer

District Court Begusarai Bihar under QUESTION

NO.07, "the application for cancellation of NBW

was never pressed before court, so no order was

passed upon it and neither the petitioner nor

his advocate had appeared before the court" has

been falsified by the record of Ld. Trail Court

at New Delhi in Case No. HMA-700 of 2010 and on

the ground of which Hon’ble High Court of Delhi

has pronounced the Judgement in Case No. MAT.

APPL. 7 of 2012 on 23.07.2013 in favor of us.

42. Ld. Public Information Officer, Law

Department, Government of Bihar has directly

refused to reply under RTI Act 2005 on the

ground of "non-availability of records and PIO

is not answerable to imaginary questions of

applicant" while the Hon'ble Chief Minister's

Secretariat has found it under negative list

and forwarded our complaint dated 18th July

2016 to the Law Department Government of Bihar

as evident from the TWO disposal order (without

resolution in the garb of section 2(a) of Bihar

Public Grievances Redressal Right Act 2015)

passed by the Law Department itself on

11.08.2016

43. Peculiar fact of this matter is that the

Hon’ble Judges have played a role of

respondents throughout the case either in Delhi

or in Bihar. Actual party has not even filed a

single piece of paper before the Ld. Trial

court at New Delhi.

44. Since 2004 to 2009, criminal conspiracy

through local leaders and Mafia and since 2010

to till date, through Indian Courts.

45. Everything has been finished. 12 years

long criminal conspiracy has taken away the

life of my above the knee amputee husband

untimely in 2007 and we (me and my ailing son)

have been kept captive and house arrest

virtually.

46. That the criminal trespass has been

committed by Mr. Bihari Lal Bubna, an elected

PRI leader with the consent of S.P. of Katihar.

House of petitioner has been turned into public

Toilet with the posters which has been placed

on record with Writ (C) 90 of 2016 before this

Hon’ble Court through interlocutory

application. False police enquiry report has

been submitted by the S.P. Katihar to the Chief



us the snaps of public toilet through Watsup

which has been declined by the police enquiry

report.

47. How State Apparatus and Mafia are involved

in criminal conspiracy against a vulnerable OBC

senior citizen oxygen dependent voiceless widow

woman in two states viz. Delhi & Bihar since

2004 has been apprised before the Hon’ble

Supreme Court of India from time to time


9483/2013, SLP(C) no. 19073/2013 and Writ (C)

90 of 2016?

48. Hon’ble Retd. Justice, Mr. S.B. Sinha of

this Hon’ble Court and aborigine of Dhanbad,

Jharkhand Bihar is mastermind behind it.

49. On the ground of reliable information

received from a driver of the Judges, we have

immediately contacted Rtd. Hon’ble Justice

S.B.Sinha over his landline telephone 011-

23010350 at his Government allotted residence

and subsequently sent an email letter dated

17.08.2011 to him on his official email ID

[email protected], then holding the post

of Chairman at Telecom Disputes Settlement and

Appellate Tribunal (TDSAT), New Delhi to stop

the criminal conspiracy against me and my

ailing son. He did not pay any heed, rather

raised a question "Who the hell are you???" My

son replied back that he is a common man.

Second question; who told you? Son replied back

a driver of Judges and he is the tenant of that

driver in Palam Colony at New Delhi; he asked

him to put the phone down.

50. It is also evident from an application at Palam

Village Police Station, South West District of

Delhi vide diary no. 37B and complaint

no.00081710571601332 dated 30.05.2016 for

registration of criminal complaint against the

spoofed calls with life threat u/s 200 of Cr.Pc.

and registration of FIR u/s 154(3) of Cr.Pc.

51. Police did not register F.I.R against the

Judge. Police directed us to go to the Court;

and upon the direction of Court, Police will

register F.I.R.

52. That the matter is interlinked with

Corruption.

53. That the life or personal liberty of the

petitioner is at stake.

54. That for the first time, this year; the

petitioner is being compelled to cancel her

routine annual home visit on the eve of Durga

Puja.

55. That the petitioner has been encircled by

Mr. Surendra Narayan Poddar and his Mafia-

political leader-State apparatus nexus in Delhi

as well as in Bihar to kill the petitioner and

her single son to usurp her property in Bihar

process u/s 83 Cr.Pc. after the death of the

petitioner and her son which has been kept

secret by the Ld. CJM Court Begusarai since

2011 to till date.

56. That Mr. Praveen Kumar from Indian Defense

Account Service, presently as C&MD on

deputation basis with Indian Drugs &

Pharmaceuticals Ltd, Scope Complex, Lodhi Road,

New Delhi has encircled the petitioner and her

son in Delhi and has kept the petitioner and

her son captive under house arrest virtually.

57. That the matter is not an individual as it

is in the interest of larger Public. Thus,

power elite can infringe the right to life or

personal liberty of a vulnerable common woman

and take them on hostage to make them a bonded

labour; can infringe the right to live with

dignity.

58. That the matter is a constitutional as

well. It is the concern of all citizens. Thus,

after winning from one High Court one cannot go

to another High Court for the same cause of

action and for the same relief.

59. The matter is also concern for all Senior

Citizen Women.

60. The letter-petition is also concern with

the entire petitioner-in Person.

61. That petitioner is putting up the matter

before Hon’ble the Chief Justice of India.

-:PRAYER:-



(xiii) To admit the letter-petition as PIL.

(xiv) To save the life of the voiceless

OBC Senior Citizen Woman from the

rampant atrocities of State

Apparatus in Bihar as well as in NCT

of Delhi.

(xv) To ensure life or personal liberty

of the petitioner under Article 21

of the Constitution of India.

(xvi) To cancel the N.B.W dated 08.09.2011

process u/s 83 Cr.Pc. issued by Ld.

CJM Division Begusarai, Bihar.

(xvii) To quash the criminal proceeding u/s

498A pending before the Ld. CJM

division Begusarai, Bihar.

(xviii) To ensure the right of petitioner

to mention the matter before Hon’ble

the Chief Justice of India’s Court.

(xix) To pass such other orders and






DRAWN & FILED BY:

PETITIONER

ASHA RANI DEVI

NEW DELHI:

FILED ON : 13.10.2016.

Annexure: P-12



I.A.NO. OF 2016

IN


IN THE MATTER OF:

OM PRAKASH & ANR …………..PETITIONER

VERSUS

STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ….RESPONDENT

APPLICATION FOR LISTING WRIT PETITION

CRIMINAL 136 OF 2016 BEFORE THE

CONSTITUTION BENCH OF SEVEN JUDGES BENCH.

To

Hon'ble the Chief Justice of India of

the Supreme Court of India. The

Humble petition of the Petitioner

abovenamed.

MOST RESPECFULLY SHOWETH:

1. That the above named petitioner has

filed the accompanying present petition under

Article 32 of the Constitution of India to


Constitution of India to quash the order dated

26.08.2016 in case No.5591 of 2013 u/s 498A

passed by the Ld. SDJM Court No.16, Ld. CJM

Division at Begusarai under the jurisdiction of

Hon’ble High Court of Patna which has directly

infringed the Fundamental Rights of the

petitioner under Article 21 of the constitution

of India whereby and where the Ld. CJM cum PIO

has furnished the false RTI reply against the

same question of law laid down in the petition

and has erred in holding the frivolous criminal

proceedings for the same cause of action which

has been settled by the Hon’ble High Court of

Delhi in MAT. APPL. 7/2012 on 23.07.2013, which

has resulted in miscarriage of justice, the

contents of which are requested to be read as

part of this application, as the same are not

being repeated here for the sake of brevity.

2. That the petitioner had applied

for urgent mentioning of the matter before

Hon’ble the Chief Justice of India through

Mentioning officer of this Hon’ble Court

without routing through the registry on the













3. That the Mentioning officer

initially returned the URGENT mentioning

application of the petitioner on 06.10.2016

as it does not qualify the ground for

urgency to mention before Hon’ble the Chief

Justice of India. Mentioning officer asked

very surprising question from the

petitioner. Why have you not executed the

N.B.W so far? How did you know about

N.B.W.? How it came into your mind to file

RTI against Ld. CJM Begusarai?

4. That the Mentioning officer then

consulted Registrar and reverted back after

1 and half hour and took back the urgent

mentioning application of the petitioner in

the evening of 06.10.2016 and directed the

petitioner to check the evening mentioning

cause list for 07.10.2016.

5. Hence the Court No.06 was allocated

for mentioning instead of Hon’ble the Chief

Justice of India’s Court.

6. That the Mentioning officer of

this Hon’ble Court has intentionally routed

my urgent mentioning application through

registry in the evening of 06.10.2016

despite of my protest to directly allow me

for mentioning before Hon’ble the Chief



7. Hence, the petitioner is aggrieved by

the intentional act of Mentioning officer for

listing the matter before the Court No.06 as

the same Hon’ble bench of this Court No.06 has

dismissed the Writ (C) 90 of 2016, although the






8. That the petitioner has submitted

before the Hon’ble Court No.06 to grant me

liberty to mention the matter before Hon’ble

the Chief Justice of India’s Court. Hence,

order dated 07.10.2016 has been passed by the

Hon’ble Court No. 06 in Writ (Crl.) 136 of

2016.

9. That the petitioner being called on

17.10.2016 by the mentioning officer for fresh

application however petitioner being harassed

whole day from PRO to mentioning officer and

directly refused by the mentioning officer as

his role is over now.

10. That the petitioner no.02 has

submitted Letter-Petition dated 08.10.2016 and

13.10.2016 before Hon’ble the Chief Justice of

India through email; speed post; and by hand

respectively against rampant atrocities on

Senior Citizen, Oxygen dependent, uneducated,

OBC, voiceless, rural woman in two states viz.

Bihar as well as in Delhi since 12 years.

Letter-Petition dated 19.08.2016 vide diary no.

35529 has been rejected by this Hon’ble Court

as it did not cover under the guideline of PIL;

although the matter in the larger public

interest.

11. That the petitioner no.02 had two members





at New Delhi and herself.

12. Since 2004 to 2009, criminal

conspiracy through local leaders and Mafia and

since 2010 to till date, through Indian Courts.

13. Everything has been finished. 12 years

long criminal conspiracy has taken away the

life of my above the knee amputee husband

untimely in 2007 and she (she and her ailing

son) have been kept captive and house arrest

virtually.





Toilet with the posters which has been placed

on record with Writ (C) 90 of 2016 before this

Hon’ble Court through interlocutory

application. False police enquiry report has

been submitted by the S.P. Katihar to the Chief



us the snaps of public toilet through Watsup

which has been declined by the police enquiry

report.

15. How State Apparatus and Mafia are involved

in criminal conspiracy against a vulnerable OBC

senior citizen oxygen dependent voiceless widow

woman in two states viz. Delhi & Bihar since

2004 has been apprised before the Hon’ble

Supreme Court of India from time to time


9483/2013, SLP(C) no. 19073/2013 and Writ (C)

90 of 2016?

16. That two states jurisdictions

involved into this matter.

17. That the matter is a constitutional.

It is the concern of all citizens. Thus, after

winning from one High Court one cannot go to

another High Court for the same cause of action

and for the same relief.

18. That, two N.B.W has been issued by

the same Ld. CJM division Begusarai for the

same cause of action against the same accused

on different dates without F.I.R and police

diary after a gap of 5 years from the date of








High Court against the petitioner no.01 & 02,

wherein, N.B.W dated 25.08.2010 is open and on

the record of Ld. Trial Court at New Delhi and

the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India while N.B.W


Ld. CJM division Begusarai. Records of


25.08.2010 has been erased by the Ld. CJM Court

Begusarai which has been disclosed through RTI

reply dated 27.08.2016. However, the records

are available at Ld. Trial Court at New Delhi

on the ground of which Hon’ble High Court of

Delhi has pronounced Judgment in MAT.APPL. NO.

7 of 2012 on 23.07.2013.

19. That upon direct refusal by

mentioning officer to allow the petitioner to

mention the matter before Ho’nble the Chief


down in the handbook of Hon’ble Supreme Court

of India and the schedule listing of the matter

fixed by the registry on 21.10.2016; the

petitioner has been left with no option but to

file an application for listing this matter

before the constitution bench of seven Judges.

PRAYER

It is most respectfully prayed that this Hon’ble

Court may be pleased to:

(a) Kindly list the Writ Criminal 136 of 2016

before the Constitution Bench of Seven Judges.

b) Pass such other order/orders as this Hon'ble

Court may deem just and proper in the facts

and circumstances of the case.

DRAWN & FILED BY:


OM PRAKASH

NEW DELHI:

FILED ON :18.10.2016. VIDE DIARY NO.77878.




IN THE MATTER OF:


VERSUS

STATE OF BIHAR & ORS …….RESPONDENT

AFFIDAVIT

I, Om Prakash S/o Late D. N. Poddar, aged 42 years,

R/o RZF/893, Netaji Subash Marg, Raj Nagar Part-II,

Palam Colony, New Delhi - 77, do hereby solemnly

affirm and state on oath as under:-






listing the Writ Petition (Criminal) 136 of

2016 before the Constitution bench of Seven

Judges, which has been drafted by me [para 01

to 19.], [Page 01 to 09] and I, As. and having





151 C.P.C. for permission in person total 09

pages.’

DEPONENT

VERIFICATION:





therefrom.

Verified at New Delhi on this the 18th day of

October, 2016.

DEPONENT

Annexure: P-15

Om Prakash Poddar <[email protected]>

Sub: Prayer for URGENT hearing against Second Appeal Diary No. 183722 dated 03.11.2016; which pertains to ‘Life or Personal liberty’ of a Senior Citizen Women-reg.

Om Prakash Poddar <[email protected]> Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 2:13

PM To: [email protected]

Date: 30.11.2016

To,

The Chief Information Commissioner,

Central Information Commission

Room No.339, II Floor

August Kranti Bhavan

Bhikaji Cama Place

New Delhi-110066

Sub: Prayer for URGENT hearing against Second

Appeal Diary No. 183722 dated 03.11.2016; which

pertains to ‘Life or Personal liberty’ of a

Senior Citizen Women-reg.

Hon’ble Sir,

1. The matter pertains to Life or Personal liberty

of a Senior Citizen Women Widow Asha Rani Devi,

age about 71 years against Diary No. 183722 dated

03.11.2016. Hence, Matter is URGENT. Patna High

Court (FAA) has not replied it back against First

Appeal till date.

2. That data is important to file Curative

Petition Criminal before the Hon’ble Supreme

Court of India after the dismissal of Review

Petition Criminal 825 of 2016 in Writ Petition

Criminal 136 of 2016; which will be heard on

01.12.2016 in the Chamber of Justice Pinaki

Chandra Ghose & U U Lalit at 1:30 PM.

3. N.B.W dated 08.09.2011 process u/s 83 Cr.Pc.

has been issued and kept it secret since then for

the same cause of action which has been settled

by the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi on 23.07.2013

in MAT. APPL. 7 of 2012 after the appearance by

the respondent on 09.02.2011 before the Ld. Trial

Court at Dwarka at New Delhi.

4. Therefore praying for early hearing against the

diary no.183722 dated 03.11.2016 on the ground of

urgency; as it is still pending under scrutiny

stage with the Central Registry of CIC, New

Delhi.

Second Appellant

Om Prakash

RZF-893, Netaji Subhash Marg

Raj Nagar Part-2


Mob: 9968337815

E-mail: [email protected]

Enclosure: As Above

CIC_early hearing against diary no 183722 dated 03.11.2016.pdf 98K


https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?ui=2&ik=5635d69bd5&view=att&th=158b4678afd043dd&attid=0.1&disp=attd&realattid=f_iw4oqosh0&safe=1&zw

Annexure: P-16


Sub: Prayer for URGENT registration of matter against Second Appeal Diary No. 183722 dated 03.11.2016; which pertains to ‘Life or Personal liberty’ of a Senior Citizen Women-reg.

UmeshChandra Joshi <[email protected]> Fri, Dec 2, 2016 at 10:36 AM To: Om Prakash Poddar <[email protected]>

Sir, With reference to your above said mail, the Appeal diarised vide diary No.183722 dated 3.11.2016 was examined and it found that you have not claimed the ground of life and liberty at any stage i.e RTI application, Ist appeal or even in IInd appeal. It is out of preview of Central Registry to acceede to you request. DS(CR) On 11/30/16 02:42 PM, Om Prakash Poddar <[email protected]> wrote:

Date: 30.11.2016

To,

Shri U.C.Joshi

August Kranti Bhavan

Bhikaji Cama Place

New Delhi-110066

Sub: Prayer for URGENT registration of matter

against Second Appeal Diary No. 183722 dated

03.11.2016; which pertains to ‘Life or Personal

liberty’ of a Senior Citizen Women-reg.

Sir,

1.The matter pertains to Life or Personal liberty

of a Senior Citizen Women Widow Asha Rani Devi,

age about 71 years against Diary No. 183722 dated

03.11.2016. Hence, Matter is URGENT. Patna High

Court (FAA) has not replied it back against First

Appeal till date.

2.That data is important to file Curative

Petition Criminal before the Hon’ble Supreme

Court of India after the dismissal of Review

Petition Criminal 825 of 2016 in Writ Petition

Criminal 136 of 2016; which will be heard on

01.12.2016 in the Chamber of Justice Pinaki

Chandra Ghose & U U Lalit at 1:30 PM.


3.N.B.W dated 08.09.2011 process u/s 83 Cr.Pc.

has been issued and kept it secret since then for

the same cause of action which has been settled

by the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi on 23.07.2013

in MAT. APPL. 7 of 2012 after the appearance by

the respondent on 09.02.2011 before the Ld. Trial

Court at Dwarka at New Delhi.

4.Therefore praying for early hearing against the

diary no.183722 dated 03.11.2016 on the ground of

urgency; as it is still pending under scrutiny

stage with the Central Registry of CIC, New

Delhi.

Second Appellant

Om Prakash


Raj Nagar Part-2


Mob: 9968337815



Annexure P-17


Attn:The Secretary General,Supreme Court of India at New Delhi 1 message

Om Prakash Poddar <[email protected]> Sat, Dec 17, 2016 at 1:33

AM To: supremecourt <[email protected]>

Date: 16.12.2016

To

The Secretary General


New Delhi

Sub: URGENT MENTITIONING OF MATTER BEFORE HON’BLE

THE CHIEF JUSTICE OF INDIA’S COURT-reg.

Sir,

1. The matter pertains to imminent danger to

life and liberty of Widow Asha Rani Devi w/o

Late Shri Deep Narayan Poddar, 71 year old,

Senior Citizen, Oxygen dependent,

uneducated, OBC, rural woman who happens to

be petitioner no.02 in Writ Petition

Criminal 136 of 2016 & Review Petition

Criminal 825 of 2016 before this Hon’ble

Court.

2. That the imminent danger has been

demonstrably proven through the photographs

of the victims (Enclosed).

3. That the matter involves substantial

question of Law as to the interpretation of

Constitution is required. Two states of

jurisdictions are involved for the same


4. That an application for Constitution bench

dated 18.10.2016 vide diary no. 77878

against the Writ Petition Criminal 136 of

2016 has been filed by the petitioner which

has been circulated UNREGISTERED by the

registry.

5. That the matter is full of bloodshed

since 12 years. Above the knee amputee

father of the petitioner no.01 and

husband of petitioner no. 02 who was

passing urine and stool through catheter

has been encircled to death untimely in

2007 by the nexus of bad elements of

Mafia and state apparatus. The oxygen

dependent mother, petitioner no.02, who

is dependent on unemployed petitioner

no.01 only; and residing on rented

accommodation in Delhi, has been

encircled in the same manner and has been

put on risk of rampant misuse of 498A by

the abuse of court process, likely to be

subjected to death.

6. That the flame of the funeral of the

petitioner’s father has not extinguished

till date and still flaming in the mind of

the petitioner no.01 and it will be added by

the flame of the funeral of the petitioner’s

mother now. The house of the petitioner

no.02 has been turned into Public toilets

with Posters by the elected PRI leader with

the consent of SP Katihar w.e.f 28.02.2016

to 05.03.2016 without the permission of the

petitioner no.02 violating the Article 21 of

the Constitution of India.

7. That the petitioner no.01 does not have

any male or female family member except

her mother.

8. That N.B.W dated 08.09.2011 process u/s

83 Cr.Pc. in 498A case has been issued

and kept it secret and disclosed it

through RTI reply dated 27.08.2016 by the

Ld. CJM cum PIO, Civil Court, Begusarai,

Bihar against petitioner no.02 even after

the appearance of the client of the

respondent no.04 before Ld. Trial Court

at New Delhi and after the settlement of

the same matter by the Hon’ble High Court

of Delhi in 2013; and after three SLP(C)

no. 9854/2012, SLP(C) no. 9483/2013, SLP(C)

no. 19073/2013 before this Hon’ble Court.

9. That an offence of perjury has been

committed by the client of respondent

no.04 no.04 as well as CJM division

Begusarai Bihar with criminal intention.

10. That the client of respondent no.04

no.04 has instituted two cases before CJM

division Begusarai Bihar viz. criminal

case complaint (P) no. 9P of 2010 u/s 12 of

domestic violence, instituted on 30.03.2010

and criminal case complaint (P) no. 397C of

2011 new CIS generated No. 5591 of 2013 u/s

498A, instituted on 07.02.2011.

However, appeared before Trial Court at

New Delhi and supplied the copy of

domestic violence case with N.B.W dated

25.08.2010 before Trial Court at New

Delhi on 09.02.2011.

11. That the application for cancellation of

N.B.W dated 25.08.2010 and replication of

complaint case no.9P of 2010 u/s 43 (12) of

protection of women from domestic violence

Act, 2005 for setting aside order u/s 18,

19, 20, 21 and 22 filed by the petitioner

and the same certified copy submitted before

the Ld. Trial Court of Delhi by the

petitioner; on the ground of which Hon’ble

High Court of Delhi has pronounced the

judgment on 23.07.2013 in MAT.APPL. 7 of

2012; has been erased from the court records

of CJM division Begusarai, which has been

disclosed through RTI reply dated

27.08.2016.

12. That the RTI reply has also disclosed

that the complaint case no.9P of 2010 under

domestic violence is not pending before CJM

division Begusarai. How 498A can be

instituted after the closure of domestic

violence?

13. That the Registrar Section X has

suppressed the record of application dated

03.10.2016 for urgent mentioning and urgent

relief sought filed by the petitioner before

Hon’ble the Chief Justice of India’s court,

which has been disclosed through office

report dated 20.10.2016 by the Registrar

Section X of this Hon’ble Court.(Enclosed

certified copy of office report dated

20.10.2016)

14. That the mentioning officer has cheated

the petitioner on 06.10.2016 and listed the

matter before court no.06 instead of Hon’ble

the Chief Justice of India’s court despite

of strong protest by the petitioner.

15. That second time, the mentioning officer

has stopped the petitioner to mention the


India’s court even after the order dated

07.10.2016 in Writ Petition Criminal 136 of

2016.

16. That the valid ground for constitution

bench has been spoiled and the petitioner

has been pushed into the curative stage

intentionally by this Hon’ble Court although

the petitioner had valid six grounds

viz. Senior Citizen woman, harassment of

OBC woman, prevention of corruption,

issuance of N.B.W dated 08.09.2011

process u/s 83 Cr.Pc. without the

knowledge of petitioner and after the






Court and short matter, as per the rules

laid down in the handbook of this Hon’ble

Court to mention the matter before Hon’ble

the Chief Justice of India’s court.

17. That the petitioner has made complaint

to the Hon’ble President of India on

21.10.2016 against this act of this Hon’ble

Court and the complaint has been forwarded

to the Department of Justice, Ministry of

Law & Justice and in turn Ministry of Law &

Justice has marked and forwarded it to the

Secretary General of Supreme Court of India

on 09.11.2016. (Enclosed).

18. That a Curative Petition Criminal has

been filed on 09.12.2016 vide diary no.41026

by the petitioner before this Hon’ble Court

and is under scrutiny.

19. Under the above mentioned circumstances,

Secretary General of Supreme Court of

India’s kind intervention is

requested/prayed to mention the matter


Court as the door of this Hon’ble court will

be closed for ever for the petitioner after

this Curative Criminal petition and

petitioner no.01 & 02 will be left to

survive or may not survive at the mercy of

the GOD.

Prayed accordingly

Petitioner-In-Person

Om Prakash

S/O Late Shri Deep Narayan Poddar


Raj Nagar, Part-2. Palam Colony

New Delh-110077

Mob:9968337815E-mail:[email protected]

ENCLOSURE:

1. As Above

2. Photographs of victims

3. Certified Copy of Office report India

along with applications dated 03.10.16 &

18.10.16

4. Ministry of Law & Justice forwarded

complaint to Secretary General of Supreme

Court of India dated 09.11.2016 (Three pdf

files attached)

mailto:E-mail%[email protected]

6 attachments

Om Prakash to Secretary general of SC.pdf 68K

Photographs of Victims.pdf 493K

Certified Copy of Office report India along with applications dated 03.10.16 & 18.10.16.pdf 727K

Ministry of Law & Justice1 (1).pdf 70K



https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?ui=2&ik=5635d69bd5&view=att&th=159093b716adc191&attid=0.1&disp=attd&realattid=f_iws7ypo30&safe=1&zw

https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?ui=2&ik=5635d69bd5&view=att&th=159093b716adc191&attid=0.2&disp=attd&realattid=f_iws7yzd91&safe=1&zw

https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?ui=2&ik=5635d69bd5&view=att&th=159093b716adc191&attid=0.3&disp=attd&realattid=f_iws80efz2&safe=1&zw

https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?ui=2&ik=5635d69bd5&view=att&th=159093b716adc191&attid=0.4&disp=attd&realattid=f_iws81ua73&safe=1&zw

https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?ui=2&ik=5635d69bd5&view=att&th=159093b716adc191&attid=0.5&disp=attd&realattid=f_iws825ms4&safe=1&zw

https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?ui=2&ik=5635d69bd5&view=att&th=159093b716adc191&attid=0.6&disp=attd&realattid=f_iws82fk45&safe=1&zw

Annexure P-18


Attn:The Registrar (Miscellaneous) Section X

1 message

Om Prakash Poddar <[email protected]> Thu, Dec 22, 2016 at 7:39

PM To: supremecourt <[email protected]> Cc: [email protected]

To,

The Registrar (Miscellaneous)

Section X


New Delhi

Sub: Status of email letter dated 17.12.2016

addressed to Secretary General of SCI and

subsequently received by your office dated

19.12.2016 & how long diary no.41026 dated

09.12.2016 will remain under scrutiny stage-reg.

Madam,

1. What action has been taken against my

email letter dated 17.12.2016 addressed to

the Secretary General, Supreme Court of

India, subsequently received by your office

dated 19.12.2016?

2. How long Curative Petition Criminal diary

no.41026 dated 09.12.2016 would remain under

scrutiny stage?

3. When defects will be notified against the

diary no.41026 dated 09.12.2016?

Prayed for urgency accordingly,


Om Prakash





New Delh-110077

Mob:9968337815



Annexure P-19


Attn:The Registrar (Miscellaneous),Supreme Court of India at New Delhi 1 message

Om Prakash Poddar <[email protected]> Sat, Dec 31, 2016 at 3:50

PM To: supremecourt <[email protected]>

To



New Delhi

Sub: URGENT MENTITIONING OF MATTER BEFORE HON’BLE

THE CHIEF JUSTICE OF INDIA’S COURT BECAUSE OF

NEXUS OF RTD JUSTICE S.B. SINHA AND PRAVEEN KUMAR

(IDAS)-reg.

Sir,

1. This is in continuation of my email

letter dated 17.12.2016

2. That there is a Nexus of Rtd. Justice S.B.

Sinha and Praveen Kumar (IDAS) involved into

this 12 years long matter to kill me and my

Oxygen dependent mother in the defense area

of Palam New Delhi and to usurp our property

in Bihar has been apprised to the Hon’ble

Supreme Court of India through SLP(C) no.

9854/2012, SLP(C) no. 9483/2013, SLP(C) no.

19073/2013, Writ (C) 90 of 2016, Writ (Crl.)

136 of 2016, Review (Crl.) 825 of 2016 and

Curative (Crl.) vide diary no. 41026;

Hon’ble prime Minister of India through

PMOPG/E/2016/0599866 dated 22.12.2016;

Hon’ble President of India through

PRSEC/E/2016/16154 dated 30.12.2016 and

Controller General Defense Accounts (CGDA),

Government of India through email dated

28.12.2016 to take appropriate action

against Rtd. Justice S.B. Sinha and Praveen

Kumar (IDAS).

3. That the petitioner is humbly praying from

the Registrar (Miscellaneous) Supreme Court

of India to urgently mention the matter

before Hon’ble the Chief Justice of India to

intervene into the matter to STOP AND PUNISH

Rtd. Justice S.B. Sinha and Praveen Kumar

(IDAS) as they are posing imminent danger to

the life and liberty of the petitioner and

his Oxygen dependent old age mother.

4. THAT THE EVIDENCES OF NEXUS OF RTD JUSTICE

S.B. SINHA AND PRAVEEN KUMAR (IDAS) HAVE

BEEN ENCLOSED WITH THIS EMAIL LETTER IN 13

PAGES AND 29 PARA ONLY FOR YOUR KIND PERUSAL

AND NECESSAY ACTION PLEASE.

Prayed accordingly


Om Prakash

(In Curative Petition Criminal vide diary

no. 41026 dated 09.12.2016)




New Delh-110077

Mob:9968337815


ENCLOSURE:

1. Evidences 13 pages & 29 para

Evidence of Nexus of Rtd Justice S.B. Sinha and Praveen Kumar IDAS to Secretary General SCI by Om Prakash.pdf 263K


https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?ui=2&ik=5635d69bd5&view=att&th=1595464e891dca12&attid=0.1&disp=attd&realattid=f_ixd2fmuv0&safe=1&zw

Annexure P-20


letter

1 message

Section X, Supreme Court of India <[email protected]> Thu, Jan 5, 2017 at 10:41 AM To: [email protected]

THROUGH SPEED POST

SUPREME COURT

INDIA NEW DELHI

D.No.5356/2016/X

Dated:03.01.2017

FROM: ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

SUPRME COURT OF INDIA.

TO:

MR. OM PRAKASH, PETITIONER-IN-PERSON,

RZF-893, NETAJI SUBASH MARG,

RAJ NAGAR PART-2, PALAM COLONY,

NEW DELHI-110077.

CURATIVE PETITION CRIMINAL NO. OF 2016 (D.No. 41026 of 2016)

IN

REVIEW PETITION CRIMINAL NO.825 OF 2016

IN

WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) NO.136 Of 2016

OM PRAKASH & ANR. …..PETITIONERS

-VERSUS-

STATE OF BIHAR & ORS. ..RESPONDENTS

Sir,

With reference to curative petition filed by you on 09.12.2016

same is defective for the following reasons:

1. The certificate of Senior Advocate has not been filed.

2. Two more paperbooks of writ petition and review petition to

be filed.

3. The word “Crl. M.P. No. ..” may be shown on application as

well as in index and cover page of curative petition.

You are, therefore, requested to cure the aforesaid defects

within 28 days from the receipt of this letter failing which

same will be dealt with as per the Supreme Court Rules, 2013.

Yours faithfully,

ASSISTANT REGISTRAR


Annexure P-21

Final Status of JUSTC/R/2017/50023

Applicant Name OM PRAKASH

Date of receipt 05/01/2017

Request Filed With Department of Justice

Text of Application

Matter pertains to imminent danger to Life and Liberty of a Senior Citizen oxygen dependent woman therefore information has been sought in view of section 7 sub clause 1 of RTI Act 2005 Why Registrar Miscellaneous of Supreme Court of India violated the Rules of Supreme Court of India and did not list the matter before Honble the Chief Justice of India as the petitioner no 02 had filed an application for urgent mentioning of the matter and urgent relief sought before Honble the Chief Justice of India on 03 10 2016 on the six grounds viz Senior Citizen woman harassment of OBC woman prevention of corruption issuance of NBW dated 08 09 2011 process u s 83 CrPc without the knowledge of petitioner and after the settlement of the same matter by the Honble High Court of Delhi on 23 07 2013 in MAT APPL 7 of 2012 apprehension of demolition of property interlinkages of matter with old matter of this Honble Court and short matter as per the rules laid down in the handbook of this Honble Court to mention the matter before Honble the Chief Justice of Indias court Why the Registrar Misc Section X has suppressed the record of application dated 03 10 2016 for urgent mentioning and urgent relief sought filed by the petitioner before Honble the Chief Justice of Indias court in its office report dated 20 10 2016 issued by the Registrar Section X of this Honble Court Why Registrar Misc has circulated an application for Constitution bench dated 18 10 2016 vide diary no 77878 UNREGISTERED against the Writ Petition Criminal 136 of 2016 filed by the petitioner Why the Registrar Misc has closed the door of Honble the Chief Justice of Indias court for the petitioner no 02 and spoiled the valid ground of constitution bench and pushed her into the curative stage intentionally Why Registrar Misc has closed the door of Honble Supreme Court of India for ever for the petitioner after raising the same defect which has been clarified by the petitioner under para 15 of the Curative petition Criminal through email letter dated 05 01 2017 against Curative Criminal Petition vide diary no 41026 filed by petitioner on 09 12 2016 Why mentioning officer of Supreme Court of India cheated the petitioner on 06 10 2016 and listed the matter before court no 06 instead of Honble the Chief Justice of Indias court despite of strong protest by the petitioner Why matter has not been mentioned before Honble the Chief Justice of Indias court even after two emails dated 17 12 2016 and 31 12 2016 addressed to Secretary General of Supreme Court of India for urgent mentioning of the matter before Honble the Chief Justice of India Why Honble Apex Court is shielding and protecting the bad elements of State Apparatus and harassing offending victimizing the petitioner and his old aged oxygen dependent mother wherein the Nexus of Rtd Justice S B Sinha and Praveen Kumar IDAS Offence of PERJURY have been apprised categorically attached Certified Copy of Office report of SCI

Request document (if any)

Status REQUEST PHYSICALLY TRANSFERRED TO OTHER PUBLIC AUTHORITY as on 05/01/2017

Date of Action 05/01/2017

Remarks Details of Public Authority :- Registrar Admn Supreme Court of India

https://rtionline.gov.in/request/pdfDocument.php?regId=%2BC7S%2B2fwW7vG%2FyNnjXxLJd%2FJWoPVDHaeSf8b54Cz%2FNc%3D

Annexure P-22


Attn:The Registrar (Miscellaneous)

1 message

Om Prakash Poddar <[email protected]> Fri, Jan 6, 2017 at 3:41

PM To: [email protected]

To,


Section X


New Delhi

Sub: Cure of Defects raised against the Curative

Petition Criminal vide diary no. 41026 dated

09.12.2016 through defects notification letter

vide diary no. 5356/2016/X dated 03.01.2017 and

emailed on 05.01.2017 –reg

Hon’ble Madam,

1. The reason for Defect no.01 has been

clarified in the para no.15 of the Curative

Petition Criminal and the same to be

considered as cure from the petitioner’s

end.

2. That the petitioner will cure the defect

no.02 & 03 on 07.01.2017, if permitted by

you, under the above circumstances.

You are, therefore requested to change the status

of diary no. 41026 from “Under Scrutiny stage to

either registered or unregistered”, so that, I

could file a fresh Writ Petition Criminal against

Union of India making Hon’ble Supreme Court of

India as party.

Hence, requested to change the status of petition

by Saturday otherwise I will file a fresh Writ

Petition Criminal on 09.01.2017.

Filed on: 06.01.2017 OM PRAKASH

New Delhi: PETITIONER IN PERSON


Annexure P-23


Attn:The Registrar Admin & FAA, Supreme Court of India at New Delhi

Om Prakash Poddar <[email protected]> Mon, Jan 9, 2017 at 7:54

PM To: supremecourt <[email protected]>

Date: 09/01/2017

Ref: Reply of Online RTI request No.

JUSTC/R/2017/50023 dated 05.01.2017 in view of

Section 7(1) of RTI Act 2005.

From:

Om Prakash


R/O RZF-893, Netaji Subhas Marg

Raj Nagar Part-2, Palam Colony,

New Delhi-10077

Mob: 9968337815


To,

The First Appellate Authority (FAA),

The Registrar Admin & FAA,


Tilak Marg, New Delhi

Sub: First Appeal U/S 19 (1) of RTI Act 2005 in

view of section 7(1) of RTI Act 2005

Dear Sir/ Madam,

1. That the CAPIO, Department of Justice,

Ministry of Law & Justice, Government of

India, physically transferred RTI

application in view of Section 7(1) of RTI

Act 2005 received online vide registration

no. JUSTC/R/2017/50023 dated 05.01.2017 to

the Registrar Admin Supreme Court of India


dated 05.01.2017 (enclosed herewith the

reply of online RTI request transferred by

Department of Justice to the Registrar Admin

Supreme Court of India dated 05.01.2017).

2. That Registrar Admin, Supreme Court of

India neither supplied the requested

information sought within 48 hours nor

forwarded to the Public Authority under

section 6(3)(i)(ii) of RTI Act, 2005 to

which the subject matter is more closely

connected with.

3. That either you can supply it or else you

can order to supply the same. Hence, request

you to pass an order to supply the following

Information satisfactorily, or supply the

same as per the rules under RTI Act-2005 in

view of Section 7(1) of RTI Act 2005. My

point wise averments and arguments are as

under:

Matter pertains to imminent danger to Life

and Liberty of a Senior Citizen oxygen

dependent woman therefore information has

been sought in view of section 7(1) of RTI

Act 2005

4. Why Registrar Miscellaneous of Supreme

Court of India violated the Rules of Supreme

Court of India and did not list the matter


court as the petitioner no. 02 had filed an

application for urgent mentioning of the

matter and urgent relief sought before

Hon’ble the Chief Justice of India’s court

on 03.10.2016 on the six grounds viz. Senior

Citizen woman; harassment of OBC woman;

prevention of corruption; issuance of NBW

dated 08.09.2011 process u/s 83 Cr.Pc.

without the knowledge of petitioner and

after the settlement of the same matter

by the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi on

23.07.2013 in MAT. APPL. 7 of 2012;

apprehension of demolition of property;

inter linkages of matter with old matter

of this Hon’ble Court and short matter as

per the rules laid down in the handbook

of this Hon’ble Court to mention the


India’s court?

5. Why the Registrar Misc. Section X has


03.10.2016 for urgent mentioning and urgent

relief sought filed by the petitioner before


in its office report dated 20.10 2016 issued

by the Registrar Section X of this Hon’ble

Court?

6. Why Registrar Misc. has circulated an

application for Constitution bench dated

18.10.2016 vide diary no 77878 UNREGISTERED

against the Writ Petition Criminal 136 of

2016 filed by the petitioner?

7. Why the Registrar Misc. has closed the

door of Hon’ble the Chief Justice of India’s

court for the petitioner no. 02 and spoiled

the valid ground of constitution bench and

pushed her into the curative stage

intentionally?

8. Why Registrar Misc. has closed the door of

Hon’ble Supreme Court of India for ever for

the petitioner after raising the same defect

which has been clarified by the petitioner

under para 15 of the Curative petition

Criminal through email letter dated

05.01.2017 against Curative Criminal

Petition vide diary no 41026 filed by

petitioner on 09.12 2016?

9. Why mentioning officer of Supreme Court of

India cheated the petitioner on 06.10.2016

and listed the matter before court no. 06

instead of Hon’ble the Chief Justice of

India’s court despite of strong protest by

the petitioner?

10. Why matter has not been mentioned before


even after two emails dated 17.12.2016 and

31.12.2016 addressed to Secretary General of

Supreme Court of India for urgent mentioning

of the matter before Hon’ble the Chief

Justice of India’s court?

11. Why Hon’ble Apex Court is shielding and

protecting the bad elements of State

Apparatus and harassing offending

victimizing the petitioner and his old aged

oxygen dependent mother wherein the Nexus

of Rtd. Justice S. B. Sinha and Praveen

Kumar (IDAS); Offence of PERJURY; 12 years

long criminal conspiracy; backstabbing;

evasion of rule of law by the Advocates and

Judges from lower court to High Court to

Supreme Court of India since 12 years; NO

ACTUAL PARTY ONLY PROXY WAR THROUGH JUDGES

IN TWO STATES SINCE 12 YEARS from Lower

Court to High Court to Supreme Court and

Seven Cases have reached up to Supreme Court

of India till 09.12.2016; have been apprised

categorically by the petitioner?

Appellant falls under below the poverty line

Category hence requisite fees not enclosed

with this RTI request.

The petitioner is filing the present First Appeal

to the First Appellate Authority, Registrar

Admin, Supreme Court of India to seek reply

against the above noted 8 questions.

DRAWN & FILED BY:


OM PRAKASH

NEW DELHI:

FILED ON : 09.01.2017

Encl:

1. Reply of online RTI request dated

05.01.2017

2. Certified Copy of Office report dated

20.10.2016 of Registrar Misc. Supreme Court

of India along with applications dated

03.10.16 and 18.10.2016.

2 attachments

Reply of Online RTI request dated 05.01.2017.pdf 129K

Certified Copy of Office report dated 20.10.2016 of Registrar Misc Supreme Court of India along with applications dated 03.10.16 & 18.10.16.pdf 727K

https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?ui=2&ik=5635d69bd5&view=att&th=159839de68a71f14&attid=0.1&disp=attd&realattid=f_ixq69coz0&safe=1&zw

https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?ui=2&ik=5635d69bd5&view=att&th=159839de68a71f14&attid=0.2&disp=attd&realattid=f_ixq6aja41&safe=1&zw



CR.M.P. NO. OF 2017


WITH


WITH


IN THE MATTER OF:


VERSUS


APPLICATION FOR SEEKING PERMISSION TO

APPEAR AND ARGUE THE WRIT PETITION

(CRIMINAL) IN-PERSON

To

Hon'ble the Chief Justice of India and

His Lordship's Companion Justices of



abovenamed.


1. That the present petition under

Article 32 of the Constitution of India is being

filed to enforce the Rights under Article 21 of

the Constitution of India with Writ Petition

Criminal 136 of 2016 and Writ Petition Civil 90 of

2016; whereby an offence of perjury has been

committed by Ld. CJM division Begusarai Court Bihar

and Praveen Kumar(IDAS) CMD of Indian Drugs and

Pharmaceuticals Ltd, New Delhi; Mentioning officer

and Registrar Misc. of Supreme Court of India has

violated the rules as laid down in the Handbook of

Supreme Court of India, stopped the petitioner to

mention the matter before Hon’ble the Chief Justice

of India’s court, closed the door of Hon’ble the

Chief Justice of India’s court, suppressed the

record of application dated 03.10.2016 for urgent

mentioning before Hon’ble the Chief Justice of

India’s Court in its office report, circulated an

application for Constitution bench unregistered;

spoiled the ground of Constitution bench and pushed

the petitioner into curative stage intentionally;

on the other hand two judges’ bench of this Hon’ble

Court has evaded the Rule of Law under Order

XXXVIII of Supreme Court Rule 2013 by dismissing

the Writ petition 136 of 2016 with liberty while

the petition raised substantial question of law as

to the interpretation of the Constitution required

and to be decided by a division court of not less

than five judges; closed the door of this Hon’ble

Court for the petitioner forever; protected and

shielded the bad elements of State Apparatus; and

harassed, offended and victimized the petitioner

no.01 and 02 which would have far reaching

consequences against the interest of public at

large and against the right of Senior Citizen

Woman in particular and would shake the public

confidence by reason of the association or

closeness of judge with the subject matter of

dispute; establish wrong precedent of

procedural Judicial system, encourage

malfunctioning of the State Apparatus; weaken

the basic fabric of the institutions; ignore

constitutional priority; which has caused

gross injustice, violated the principle of

natural justice, ignored the principle of ex

debito justitiae and resulted in gross

miscarriage of justice, the contents of which are

requested to be read as part of this application,

as the same are not being repeated here for the

sake of brevity.

2. That the Central Information Commission (CIC)

order dated 25.09.2014 and NALSA letter dated

13.05.2015 have not been complied by all the three

tier of legal Aid Institutions in India whereby and

where petitioner has been denied access to services

of legal Aid directly and indirectly, which has

resulted in wrong judgment by the Ld. Trial Court

and extremely painful journey of petitioner in

person at all the three tier of Hon’ble Indian

Courts throughout seven years from 2010 to 2016.

Petitioner is scared of Legal Aid Advocates.

Evidences have been placed on record against legal

aid institutions with Writ Civil 90 of 2016.

3. Petitioner does not want to engage any

Advocate against his Writ Petition (Criminal)

no…….. of 2017 even if so provided by this Hon’ble

Court.

4. That the Petitioner is well conversant with the

facts of the case and competent enough to argue the

case before this Hon’ble Court.

PRAYER



(a) Kindly permit the Petitioner to appear and

argue the Writ Petition (Criminal) in-person.




DRAWN & FILED BY:


OM PRAKASH

NEW DELHI:

FILED ON : 18.01.2017.




WITH


WITH


IN THE MATTER OF:


VERSUS


AFFIDAVIT










seeking permission to appear and argue the Writ

Petition (Criminal) in person, which has been

drafted by me [para 01 to 04.], [Page 215 to

218] and I, As. and having understood the

contents thereof I say that the facts state

therein are correct which are based on the

official record.


151 C.P.C. for permission in person total 04

pages.’

DEPONENT

VERIFICATION:





therefrom.


January, 2017.

DEPONENT



CR.M.P. NO. OF 2017


WITH


WITH


IN THE MATTER OF:


VERSUS


APPLICATION FOR SEEKING PERMISSION TO

GRANT SPECIAL POWER OF ATTORNEY TO

PETITIONER NO.01 TO APPEAR AND ARGUE THE


ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER NO.02.

To

Hon'ble the Chief Justice of India and

His Lordship's Companion Justices of



abovenamed.


5. The present petition under Article 32

of the Constitution of India is being filed to


Constitution of India with Writ Petition Criminal

136 of 2016 and Writ Petition Civil 90 of 2016;

whereby an offence of perjury has been committed by

Ld. CJM division Begusarai Court Bihar and Praveen

Kumar(IDAS) CMD of Indian Drugs and Pharmaceuticals

Ltd, New Delhi; Mentioning officer and Registrar

Misc. of Supreme Court of India has violated the

rules as laid down in the Handbook of Supreme Court

of India, stopped the petitioner to mention the

matter before Hon’ble the Chief Justice of India’s

court, closed the door of Hon’ble the Chief Justice

of India’s court, suppressed the record of

application dated 03.10.2016 for urgent mentioning

before Hon’ble the Chief Justice of India’s Court

in its office report, circulated an application for

Constitution bench unregistered; spoiled the ground

of Constitution bench and pushed the petitioner

into curative stage intentionally; on the other

hand two judges’ bench of this Hon’ble Court has

evaded the Rule of Law under Order XXXVIII of

Supreme Court Rule 2013 by dismissing the Writ


petition raised substantial question of law as to

the interpretation of the Constitution required and

to be decided by a division court of not less than

five judges; closed the door of this Hon’ble Court

for the petitioner forever; protected and shielded

the bad elements of State Apparatus; and harassed,

offended and victimized the petitioner no.01 and 02

which would have far reaching consequences

against the interest of public at large and

against the right of Senior Citizen Woman in


confidence by reason of the association or

closeness of judge with the subject matter of

dispute; establish wrong precedent of

procedural Judicial system, encourage

malfunctioning of the State Apparatus; weaken

the basic fabric of the institutions; ignore



natural justice, ignored the principle of ex

debito justitiae and resulted in gross

miscarriage of justice, the contents of which are

requested to be read as part of this application,

as the same are not being repeated here for the

sake of brevity.

6. That BY THIS POWER OF ATTORNEY I, Widow Asha

Devi, wife of Late Shri Deep Narayan Poddar,

residing at ASHA DEEP NIWAS, Vill-Kantiya

Panchayat, Shukkar Haat Sonaili, in front of

Durga Mandir, P.S. Kadwa, Distt-Katihar,

Bihar-855114 being petitioner no.02 in Writ

Petition (Criminal) of 2017 before this

Hon’ble Court do hereby authorize/ appoint

Shri Om Prakash, petitioner no.01 S/O Late

Shri Deep Narayan Poddar residing at RZF-893,

Netaji Subhash Marg, Raj Nagar, Part-2, Palam

Colony, New Delhi-110077 my attorney in my name

and on my behalf to appear and argue the Writ

Petition (Criminal) no. of 2017 before this

Hon’ble Court.

7. That N.B.W dated 08.09.2011 u/s 498A process

u/s 83 Cr.Pc. has been issued against petitioner

no.02 as well which has been disclosed by the Ld.

CJM Begusarai through RTI reply dated 27.08.2016.

8. That petitioner no.02 is an oxygen dependent

COPD patient and undergoing treatment with AIIMS at

New Delhi which is on the Hon’ble Supreme Court

Record with SLP(C) no. 9854/2012, SLP(C) no.

9483/2013, SLP(C) no. 19073/2013, Writ (C) 90 of

2016, Writ (Crl.) 136 of 2016, Review (Crl.) 825 of

2016 and Curative (Crl.) vide diary no. 41026

therefore she is unable to attend the proceedings

of this Hon’ble Court.

PRAYER



(a) Kindly permit the Petitioner no. 02 to grant

special power of attorney to petitioner no.01

to appear and argue the Writ Petition

(Criminal) no. of 2017 before this Hon’ble

Court on behalf of petitioner no.02.




DRAWN & FILED BY:

PETITIONER NO.02

WIDOW ASHA DEVI

NEW DELHI:

FILED ON : 18.01.2017.




WITH


WITH


IN THE MATTER OF:


VERSUS


AFFIDAVIT

I, Widow Asha Devi W/o Late Deep Narayan Poddar,

aged about 70 years, R/o ASHA DEEP NIWAS, Vill-

Kantiya Panchayat, Shukkar Haat Sonaili, in

front of Durga Mandir, P.S. Kadwa, Distt-

Katihar, Bihar-855114, do hereby solemnly affirm

and state on oath as under:-




affidavit.



seeking permission to grant special power of

Attorney to petitioner no.01 to appear and

argue the Writ Petition (Criminal) No………….of

2017 on behalf of petitioner no.02, which has

been drafted under my instruction [para 01 to

04.], [Page 221 to 225] and I, As. and having





151 C.P.C. for permission to grant special

power of Attorney to petitioner no.01 total 05

pages.’

DEPONENT

VERIFICATION:





therefrom.


January, 2017.

DEPONENT



CR.M.P. NO. OF 2017


WITH


WITH


IN THE MATTER OF:


VERSUS


APPLICATION FOR URGENT MENTIONING OF


BEFORE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE OF

INDIA’S COURT AND URGENT RELIEF SOUGHT

To




application of the Petitioner abovenamed.


GROUNDS FOR URGENT MENTIONING BEFORE HON’BLE

THE CHIEF JUSTICE OF INDIA’S COURT


Article 32 of the Constitution of India is

being filed to enforce the Rights under

Article 21 of the Constitution of India with

Writ Petition Criminal 136 of 2016 and Writ

Petition Civil 90 of 2016; whereby an offence

of perjury has been committed by Ld. CJM

division Begusarai Court Bihar and Praveen



officer and Registrar Misc of Supreme Court of

India has violated the rules as laid down in

the Handbook of Supreme Court of India,







Justice of India’s Court in its office report,

circulated an application for Constitution

bench unregistered; spoiled the ground of

Constitution bench and pushed the petitioner

into curative stage intentionally on the other

hand two judges bench of this Hon’ble Court

has evaded the Rule of Law under Order XXXVIII

of Supreme Court Rule 2013 by dismissing the

Writ petition 136 of 2016 with liberty while

the petition raised substantial question of

law as to the interpretation of the

Constitution required and to be decided by a

division court of not less than five judges;

closed the door of this Hon’ble Court for the

petitioner forever; protected and shielded the

bad elements of State Apparatus; and harassed,

offended and victimized the petitioner no.01

and 02 which would have far reaching

consequences against the interest of

public at large and against the right of

Senior Citizen Woman in particular and

would shake the public confidence by

reason of the association or closeness of

judge with the subject matter of dispute;

establish wrong precedent of procedural

Judicial system, encourage malfunctioning

of the State Apparatus; weaken the basic

fabric of the institutions; ignore





miscarriage of justice, the contents of

which are requested to be read as part of this

application, as the same are not being

repeated here for the sake of brevity.

2. That the six grounds have been taken viz.

Senior Citizen woman, harassment of OBC

woman, prevention of corruption, issuance

of N.B.W dated 08.09.2011 process u/s 83

Cr.Pc. without the knowledge of petitioner

and after the settlement of the same

matter by the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi

on 23.07.2013 in MAT. APPL. 7 of 2012,

apprehension of demolition of property,

interlinkages of matter with old matter of

this Hon’ble Court and short matter, as

per the rules laid down in the handbook of

this Hon’ble Court to mention the matter


court.

3. That there has been illegal confinement of

Petitioner no.01 and 02 since 12 years.

4. That an Offence of PERJURY; abuse of court

process; 12 years long criminal conspiracy;

backstabbing; evasion of rule of law by the

Advocates and Judges from lower court to High

Court to Supreme Court of India since 12

years; NO ACTUAL PARTY ONLY PROXY WAR THROUGH

JUDGES IN TWO STATES SINCE 12 YEARS from Lower

Court to High Court to Supreme Court and Eight

Cases have reached up to Supreme Court of

India till date are the main features of the

whole petition.


committed by the respondent no.05 as well

as respondent no.06 with criminal

intention.

6. That an Offence of PERJURY has been committed

by respondent no. 07, Shri Praveen Kumar

(IDAS) against the illegal termination of

service of the petitioner before Patiala House

Court at New Delhi which later converted into

Writ Petition Civil 90 of 2016 before this

Hon’ble Court, therefore Hon’ble Apex

Institutions are shielding and protecting the

bad elements of State Apparatus and harassing,

victimizing, offending the petitioner and his

old aged oxygen dependent mother.

7. That the petitioner is a victim of JUDICIAL

MALFUNCTIONING. The petitioner has become a

dead man whose all families have been

encircled to death in front of his own eyes

and he could not do anything.

8. That petitioner no.01 and 02 have been

subjected to silent Death by the NEXUS OF RTD.

JUSTICE OF THIS HON’BLE COURT AND PRAVEEN

KUMAR (IDAS), RESPONDENT NO.07, EVADING THE

RULE OF LAW OF THE LAND to usurp the life time

acquired property of Petitioner no. 02 in

Bihar.

9. That the petitioner no.01 and 02 have been

left with only two options now viz. either

to shoot themselves or to become

underground leaving their life time

acquired property in Bihar.

10. That the Registrar (Misc.) of this Hon’ble

Court has circulated an application for

constitution bench vide diary no. 77878 dated

18.10.2016 unregistered against Writ Petition

Criminal 136 of 2016 before two judges’ bench.

11. That the Registrar Misc. of this Hon’ble

Court has neither registered nor unregistered

the Curative Petition Criminal vide diary no.

41026 but kept the same under scrutiny stage

even after several reminders by the

petitioner.

12. That the matter involves substantial

question of Law as to the interpretation of

Constitution is required. Two states of

jurisdictions are involved for the same cause

of action and for the same relief. After

winning from High Court of Delhi petitioner is

being directed by this Hon’ble Court to

approach Patna High Court for the same cause of

action and for the same relief.

13. That petitioner is enabling the Hon’ble

Apex Institutions with material evidence to

punish the BAD ELEMENTS OF STATE APPARATUS.

14. That the matter pertains to imminent

danger to life and liberty of Widow Asha Rani

Devi w/o Late Shri Deep Narayan Poddar, 71

year old, Senior Citizen, Oxygen dependent,

uneducated, OBC, rural woman who happens to be

petitioner no.02 in this Writ Petition

Criminal.

15. That the imminent danger has been

demonstrably proven through the photographs of

the victims in the petition.



father of the petitioner no.01 and husband

of petitioner no. 02 who was passing urine

and stool through catheter has been

encircled to death untimely in 2007 by the

nexus of bad elements of Mafia and state

apparatus. The oxygen dependent mother,

petitioner no.02, who is dependent on

unemployed petitioner no.01 only; and

residing on rented accommodation in Delhi,

has been encircled in the same manner and

has been put on risk of rampant misuse of

498A by the abuse of court process, likely

to be subjected to death.


petitioner’s father has not extinguished till

date and still flaming in the mind of the

petitioner no.01 and it will be added by the

flame of the funeral of the petitioner’s

mother now. The house of the petitioner no.02

has been turned into Public toilets with

Posters by the elected PRI leader with the

consent of SP Katihar w.e.f 28.02.2016 to

05.03.2016 without the permission of the

petitioner no.02 violating the Article 21 of

the Constitution of India. Petitioner has

adduced all material evidences as Annexure P-1

to P-5 with this Writ (Crl.) of 2017 before



any male or female family member except

his mother.

19. That the State Apparatus of two States are

involved in criminal conspiracy against

petitioner no.01 and 02 to kill the petitioner

no.01 and 02 to usurp their property in Bihar

and the controller of the bad elements of

State Apparatus, a central Government

employee, Praveen Kumar (IDAS) and a Rtd.

Justice of Hon’ble Supreme Court reside at New

Delhi and all directions go from Delhi to

Bihar. All events have taken place either in

Bihar or in Delhi against the petitioner

during 2004 to 2016 at the behest of direction

from Delhi.

20. That Shri Praveen Kumar from Indian

Defense Account Service presently as C&MD on

deputation basis with Indian Drugs &

Pharmaceuticals Ltd, Scope Complex, Lodhi

Road, New Delhi has encircled us in Bihar as

well as in Delhi and kept us captive illegally

in house arrest virtually. The Petitioner has

filed Writ (Civil) 90 of 2016 against Praveen

Kumar (IDAS) for illegal termination of

service before Hon’ble Supreme Court of India

which has been dismissed on 18.04.2016 but the

same has been pending as PIL vide diary

no.2206 dated 09.01.2016 under Grievance

Management System of Hon’ble Supreme Court of

India. The petitioner has apprised the same to

Controller General Defense Accounts for

appropriate departmental action against

Praveen Kumar (IDAS) through email dated

28.12.2016.

21. That petitioner and his Senior Citizen

Oxygen dependent mother have been kept captive

illegally in the dark room since 12 years by

the nexus of Rtd Justice of this Hon’ble Court

and Praveen Kumar from Indian Defense Account

Service, presently as CMD with Indian Drugs

and Pharmaceuticals Ltd Scope Complex Lodhi

Road New Delhi as respondent no.07 in this

petition. Petitioner and his infirm old age

mother have not seen the color of this world

since 12 years.

22. That N.B.W dated 08.09.2011 process u/s

83 Cr.Pc. has been issued in 498A case and

kept it secret and disclosed it through

RTI reply dated 27.08.2016 by the Ld. CJM

cum PIO, Civil Court, Begusarai, Bihar

against petitioner no.02 even after the

appearance of the client of the respondent

no.06 before Ld. Trial Court at New Delhi

and after the settlement of the same

matter by the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi

in 2013; and after three SLP(C) no.

9854/2012, SLP(C) no. 9483/2013, SLP(C) no.

19073/2013 before Hon’ble Supreme Court of

India.

23. That the client of respondent no.06 has

instituted two cases before CJM division

Begusarai Bihar viz. criminal case complaint

(P) no. 9P of 2010 u/s 12 of domestic

violence, instituted on 30.03.2010 and

criminal case complaint (P) no. 397C of 2011

new CIS generated No. 5591 of 2013 u/s 498A,

instituted on 07.02.2011. However, appeared

before Trial Court at New Delhi and

supplied the copy of domestic violence

case with N.B.W dated 25.08.2010 before

Trial Court at New Delhi on 09.02.2011 and

concealed the material fact of 498A case

with criminal intention and later issued

second N.B.W. dated 08.09.2011 process u/s

83 Cr.Pc. and kept it secret till date on

the file of court record.

24. That the application for cancellation of


complaint case no.9P of 2010 u/s 43 (12) of


Act, 2005 for setting aside order u/s 18, 19,

20, 21 and 22 filed by the petitioner and the

same certified copy submitted before the Ld.

Trial Court of Delhi by the petitioner; on the

ground of which Hon’ble High Court of Delhi

has pronounced the judgment on 23.07.2013 in

MAT.APPL. 7 of 2012; has been erased from the

court records of CJM division Begusarai, which

has been disclosed through RTI reply dated

27.08.2016.

25. That the RTI reply dated 27.08.2016 has

also disclosed that the complaint case no.9P

of 2010 under domestic violence is not pending

before CJM division Begusarai. How 498A can be


violence?

26. That Registry of Hon’ble Supreme Court of

India has raised defects in the original Writ

Petition Civil 90 of 2016 filed by the

petitioner as the petitioner had made genuine

allegations against Rtd Justice of this

Hon’ble on the ground of a statement given by

a driver of Judge Brajesh Yadav & Pappu Yadav

who happened to be the landlord of the

petitioner in Palam Colony at New Delhi and

subsequent letter dated 17.08.2011 addressed

to Rtd Justice of this Hon’ble Court by the

petitioner. However, petitioner removed the

name of Rtd Justice from the petition to cure

the defects of the petition and refiled it.

However, the letter dated 17.08.2011 addressed

to Rtd Justice has been allowed by the

registry to annex as Annexure P-06 (Page from

93 to 95) with Writ Petition Civil 90 of 2016

before Hon’ble Supreme Court of India.

27. That the circumstances in this Writ

Petition Criminal are such as it is creating a


petitioner that there is “likelihood of bias”

affecting the decision.

28. That the Registrar Section X of this

Hon’ble Court has suppressed the record of

application dated 03.10.2016 for urgent

mentioning and urgent relief sought filed by

the petitioner before Hon’ble the Chief

Justice of India’s court, which has been

disclosed through office report dated

20.10.2016 by the Registrar Section X of this

Hon’ble Court.

29. That the mentioning officer has cheated

the petitioner on 06.10.2016 and listed the

matter before court no.06 instead of Hon’ble

the Chief Justice of India’s court despite of

strong protest by the petitioner.

30. That second time, on 17.10.2016, the

mentioning officer has stopped the petitioner

to mention the matter before Hon’ble the Chief

Justice of India’s court even after the order


of 2016.

31. That the valid ground for constitution

bench has been spoiled and the petitioner has

been pushed into the curative stage

intentionally by this Hon’ble Court although

the petitioner had valid six grounds as per

the rules laid down in the handbook of

this Hon’ble Court to mention the matter


court.

32. That the petitioner has made complaint to

the Hon’ble President of India on 21.10.2016

against this act of this Hon’ble Court and the

complaint has been forwarded to the Department

of Justice, Ministry of Law & Justice and in

turn Ministry of Law & Justice has marked and

forwarded it to the Secretary General of

Hon’ble Supreme Court of India on 09.11.2016.

33. That the petitioner has prayed for urgent

mentioning of the matter before Hon’ble the

Chief Justice of India to the Secretary

General of Hon’ble Supreme Court of India

through email dated 17.12.2016 and 31.12.2016

which has been marked to Registrar (Misc)

Hon’ble Supreme Court of India.

34. That a Curative Petition Criminal has been

filed on 09.12.2016 vide diary no.41026 by the

petitioner before Hon’ble Supreme Court of

India without a Certificate by Sr. Advocate

violating the rules laid down for filing a

curative petition because the Registry has

violated the rules for urgent mentioning of

the same matter (Writ Petition Criminal 136 of

2016) before Hon’ble the Chief Justice of

India’s court as laid down in the handbook of

the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India and has

intentionally pushed the petitioner into the

curative stage.

35. That in view of the above mentioned

circumstances, the door of Hon’ble Supreme

Court of India will be closed for ever for the

petitioner after non-registration of this

Curative petition Criminal and petitioner

no.01 & 02 will be left to survive or may not

survive at the mercy of the GOD.

-:PRAYER:-

In the above premises, urgency is prayed that this


(xx) To mention the Writ Petition

Criminal No. of 2017 before

Hon’ble the Chief Justice of India’s

Court urgently for urgent relief.

(xxi) To cancel the N.B.W dated 08.09.2011

process u/s 83 Cr.Pc. issued against

Shri Om Prakash Poddar and Ms Asha

Devi by Ld. SDJM Court No.16 CJM

division Begusarai Bihar and quash

the criminal proceedings in case no.

5591 of 2013 u/s 498A pending before

the same Ld. Court.

(xxii) To pass such other orders and






DRAWN & FILED BY:

PETITIONER-IN-PERSON

OM PRAKASH

NEW DELHI:

FILED ON : 18.01.2017.




WITH


WITH


IN THE MATTER OF:


VERSUS


AFFIDAVIT

I, Om Prakash S/o Late Shri Deep Narayan Poddar,

aged about 43 years, R/o RZF-893, Netaji Subhash

Marg, Raj Nagar Part-2, Palam Colony, New Delhi-

110077, do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath

as under:-




affidavit.


application Under Section 151 C.P.C. for urgent

mentioning before Hon’ble the Chief Justice of

India’s Court and urgent relief is sought

against Writ Petition (Criminal) No. of

2017, which has been drafted by me [para 01 to

35.], [Page 228 to 244] and I, As. and having





151 C.P.C. for urgent mentioning of the matter


court totals 17 pages.’

DEPONENT

VERIFICATION:





therefrom.


January, 2017.

DEPONENT



CR.M.P. NO. OF 2017


WITH


WITH


IN THE MATTER OF:


VERSUS


APPLICATION FOR LISTING WRIT PETITION

CRIMINAL NO. OF 2017 BEFORE THE

CONSTITUTION BENCH.

To




abovenamed.


20. The present petition under Article 32

of the Constitution of India is being filed to


Constitution of India with Writ Petition

Criminal 136 of 2016 and Writ Petition Civil 90

of 2016; whereby an offence of perjury has been

committed by Ld. CJM division Begusarai Court

Bihar and Praveen Kumar(IDAS) CMD of Indian

Drugs and Pharmaceuticals Ltd, New Delhi;

Mentioning officer and Registrar Misc of

Supreme Court of India has violated the rules

as laid down in the Handbook of Supreme Court

of India, stopped the petitioner to mention the


India’s court, closed the door of Hon’ble the

Chief Justice of India’s court, suppressed the



Justice of India’s Court in its office report,

circulated an application for Constitution

bench unregistered; spoiled the ground of

Constitution bench and pushed the petitioner

into curative stage intentionally; on the other

hand two judges bench of this Hon’ble Court has

evaded the Rule of Law under Order XXXVIII of

Supreme Court Rule 2013 by dismissing the Writ


petition raised substantial question of law as

to the interpretation of the Constitution

required and to be decided by a division court

of not less than five judges; closed the door

of this Hon’ble Court for the petitioner

forever; protected and shielded the bad

elements of State Apparatus; and harassed,

offended and victimized the petitioner no.01

and 02 which would have far reaching

consequences against the interest of public

at large and against the right of Senior

Citizen Woman in particular and would shake

the public confidence by reason of the

association or closeness of judge with the

subject matter of dispute; establish wrong





priority; which has caused gross injustice,

violated the principle of natural justice,

ignored the principle of ex debito

justitiae and resulted in gross miscarriage

of justice, the contents of which are

requested to be read as part of this

application, as the same are not being repeated

here for the sake of brevity.

21. That this Writ Petition Criminal

No. of 2017 raises ‘substantial question of

law as to the interpretation of the

Constitution is required.

22. That the Registrar (Misc) of this Hon’ble

Court has circulated an application for

constitution bench vide diary no. 77878 dated

18.10.2016 unregistered against Writ Petition

Criminal 136 of 2016 before two judges’ bench.

23. That the Registrar Misc. of this Hon’ble

Court has neither registered nor unregistered

the Curative Petition Criminal vide diary no.

41026 but kept the same under scrutiny stage

even after several reminders by the petitioner.

24. That two states jurisdictions

involved into the same matter and the same

relief. After winning from High Court of Delhi

petitioner is being directed by this Hon’ble

Court to approach Patna High Court for the same



committed by the respondent no.05, 06 and

07 with criminal intention therefore Hon’ble

Apex Institutions are shielding and protecting

the bad elements of State Apparatus and

harassing, victimizing, offending the

petitioner and his old aged oxygen dependent

mother.

26. That there has been illegal confinement of

Petitioner no.01 and 02 since 12 years.

27. That an Offence of PERJURY; abuse of court

process; 12 years long criminal conspiracy;

backstabbing; evasion of rule of law by the

Advocates and Judges from lower court to High

Court to Supreme Court of India since 12

years; NO ACTUAL PARTY ONLY PROXY WAR THROUGH

JUDGES IN TWO STATES SINCE 12 YEARS from Lower

Court to High Court to Supreme Court and Eight

Cases have reached up to Supreme Court of

India till date are the main features of this

whole petition.

28. That petitioner no.01 and 02 have been

subjected to silent Death by the NEXUS OF RTD.

JUSTICE OF THIS HON’BLE COURT AND PRAVEEN

KUMAR (IDAS), RESPONDENT NO.07, EVADING THE

RULE OF LAW OF THE LAND to usurp the life time

acquired property of Petitioner no. 02 in

Bihar.

29. That the petitioner no.01 and 02 have

been left with only two options now viz.

either to shoot themselves or to become

underground leaving their life time

acquired property in Bihar.

30. That the petitioner is a victim of

JUDICIAL MALFUNCTIONING. The petitioner has

become a dead man whose all families have been

encircled to death in front of his own eyes and

he could not do anything.

31. That petitioner is enabling the Hon’ble

Apex Institutions with material evidence to

punish the BAD ELEMENTS OF STATE APPARATUS.

32. That, two N.B.W has been issued by

the same Ld. CJM division Begusarai for the

same cause of action against the same accused

on different dates without F.I.R and police

diary after a gap of 5 years from the date of








High Court against the petitioner no.01 & 02,

wherein, N.B.W dated 25.08.2010 is open and on

the record of Ld. Trial Court at New Delhi and

the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India while N.B.W


Ld. CJM division Begusarai with criminal

intention. Records of application for

cancellation of N.B.W dated 25.08.2010 has been

erased by the Ld. CJM Court Begusarai which has

been disclosed through RTI reply dated

27.08.2016. However, the records are available

at Ld. Trial Court at New Delhi on the ground

of which Hon’ble High Court of Delhi has

pronounced Judgment in MAT.APPL. NO. 7 of 2012

on 23.07.2013.

33. That the State Apparatus of two States are

involved in criminal conspiracy against

petitioner no.01 and 02 to kill the petitioner

no.01 and 02 to usurp their property in Bihar

and the controller of the bad elements of State

Apparatus, a central Government employee,

Praveen Kumar (IDAS), respondent no.07 and a

Rtd. Justice of this Hon’ble Supreme Court of

India reside at New Delhi and all directions go

from Delhi to Bihar. All events have taken

place either in Bihar or in Delhi against the

petitioner during 2004 to 2016 at the behest of

direction from Delhi.

34. That Shri Praveen Kumar (IDAS) from Indian

Defense Account Service as respondent no.07,

presently as C&MD on deputation basis with

Indian Drugs & Pharmaceuticals Ltd, Scope

Complex, Lodhi Road, New Delhi has encircled us

in Bihar as well as in Delhi and kept us

captive illegally in house arrest virtually.

The Petitioner has filed Writ (Civil) 90 of

2016 against Praveen Kumar (IDAS) for illegal

termination of service before Hon’ble Supreme

Court of India which has been dismissed on

18.04.2016 but the same has been pending as PIL

vide diary no.2206 dated 09.01.2016 under

Grievance Management System of Hon’ble Supreme

Court of India. The petitioner has apprised the

same to the Controller General Defense Accounts

for appropriate departmental action against

Praveen Kumar (IDAS) through email dated

28.12.2016.



father of the petitioner no.01 and husband

of petitioner no. 02 who was passing urine

and stool through catheter has been

encircled to death untimely in 2007 by the

nexus of bad elements of Mafia and state

apparatus. The oxygen dependent mother,

petitioner no.02, who is dependent on

unemployed petitioner no.01 only; and

residing on rented accommodation in Delhi,

has been encircled in the same manner and

has been put on risk of rampant misuse of

498A by the abuse of court process, likely

to be subjected to death.


petitioner’s father has not extinguished till

date and still flaming in the mind of the

petitioner no.01 and it will be added by the

flame of the funeral of the petitioner’s mother

now. The house of the petitioner no.02 has been

turned into Public toilets with Posters by the

elected PRI leader with the consent of SP

Katihar w.e.f 28.02.2016 to 05.03.2016 without

the permission of the petitioner no.02

violating the Article 21 of the Constitution of

India.





Toilet with the posters; false police enquiry

report has been submitted by the S.P. Katihar

to the Chief Minister Secretariat denying the

very fact of the incident. However, the

villagers have sent us the snaps of public

toilet through Watsup which has been declined

by the police enquiry report. Petitioner has

adduced all material evidences as Annexure P-1

to P-5 with this Writ (Crl.) of 2017 before



any male or female family member except his

mother.

39. That the petitioner no.02 had two members





at New Delhi and herself chronic asthmatic a

COPD case and oxygen dependent.

40. That since 2004 to 2009, criminal

conspiracy through local leaders and Mafia and

since 2010 to till date, through Indian Courts.

41. Everything has finished. 12 years long

criminal conspiracy has taken away the life of

above the knee amputee husband of the

petitioner no.02 untimely in 2007 and

petitioner no.02 and her ailing son have been

kept captive illegally and house arrest

virtually.

42. That how State Apparatus and Mafia are

involved in criminal conspiracy against a

vulnerable OBC senior citizen oxygen dependent

voiceless widow woman in two states viz. Delhi

& Bihar since 2004 has been apprised before the

Hon’ble Supreme Court of India from time to

time through SLP(C) no. 9854/2012, SLP(C) no.

9483/2013, SLP(C) no. 19073/2013 and Writ (C)

90 of 2016, Writ (Crl.) 136 of 2016, Review

Petition (Crl.) 825 of 2016 and Curative

Petition (Crl.) vide diary no.41026?

43. That Registry of Hon’ble Supreme Court of

India has raised defects in the original Writ

Petition Civil 90 of 2016 filed by the

petitioner as the petitioner had made genuine

allegations against Rtd. Justice of this

Hon’ble Court on the ground of a statement

given by a driver of Judge, Brajesh Yadav &

Pappu Yadav who happened to be the landlord of

the petitioner in Palam Colony at New Delhi and

subsequent letter dated 17.08.2011 addressed to

Rtd. Justice of this Hon’ble Court by the

petitioner. However, petitioner removed the

name of Rtd. Justice from the petition to cure

the defects of the petition and refiled it.

However, the letter dated 17.08.2011 addressed

to Rtd. Justice has been allowed by the

registry to annex as Annexure P-06 (Page from

93 to 95) with Writ Petition Civil 90 of 2016

before Hon’ble Supreme Court of India.

44. That the circumstances in this Writ

Petition Criminal are such as it is creating a


petitioner that there is “likelihood of bias”

affecting the decision.

45. That the two judge’ bench of this Hon’ble

Court has dismissed Writ Petition Criminal 136

of 2016 with liberty and directed to approach

Patna High Court which has raised substantial

question of law as to the interpretation of

Constitution required.

46. That the dismissal of the matter

pertaining to interpretation of constitution by

two judge bench of this Hon’ble Court is

inherently flawed as it contradicts the

explicit opinion expressed for deciding

allegations of “bias” by a Constitution bench

in Yadav vs State of Haryana (AIR 1987 SC,

454). While settling out the fundamental

principles for adjudicating cases involving

allegations of “bias”. A Constitution bench of

this Hon’ble Court in Yadav vs State of Haryana

(AIR 1987 SC, 454) has categorically stated,

“the question is not whether the judge is

actually biased or in fact, decides partially,

but whether there is a real likelihood of

“bias”. Because the Constitution bench of this

Hon’ble Court in Yadav vs State of Haryana (AIR

1987 SC, 454) has clearly stated that a

“likelihood of bias” is sufficient to satisfy

the legal principle to establish a case of

“bias” as the court has observed, “The real

question is not whether he was biased. It is

difficult to prove the state of mind of a

person. Therefore, what we have to see is

whether there is reasonable ground for

believing that he was likely to have been

biased”. Because in Yadav vs State of Haryana

(AIR 1987 SC, 454), the Constitution bench has

categorically stated that the issue of a

“likelihood of bias” may arise from personal

reasons such as “hostility” towards one party

or “friendship” with the other party.

Constitution Bench in Yadav vs State of Haryana

(AIR 1987 SC, 454) has observed, “What is

objectionable in such a case is not that the

decision is actually tainted with bias but that

the circumstances are such as to create a

reasonable apprehension in the mind of others

that there is likelihood of bias affecting the

decision”. The Constitution Bench has further

elaborated on this issue, “Justice is not the

function of the courts alone; it is also the

duty of all those who are expected to decide

fairly between contending parties. The strict

standard applied to authorities exercising

judicial power are being increasingly applied

to administrative bodies, for it is vital to

the maintenance of the rule of Law in a welfare

state where the jurisdiction of administrative

bodies in increasing at a rapid pace that the

instrumentalities of the State should discharge

their functions in fair and just manner.”

PRAYER



(a) Kindly list the Writ Criminal No. of 2017

before the Constitution Bench.




DRAWN & FILED BY:


OM PRAKASH

NEW DELHI:

FILED ON : 18.01.2017




WITH


WITH


IN THE MATTER OF:


VERSUS


AFFIDAVIT










listing the Writ Petition (Criminal) No………. of

2017 before the Constitution bench, which has

been drafted by me [para 01 to 27.], [Page 247

to 261] and I, As. and having understood the

contents thereof I say that the facts state


official record.


151 C.P.C. for listing before Constitution

Bench total 15 pages.’

DEPONENT

VERIFICATION:





therefrom.


January, 2017.

DEPONENT



CR.M.P. NO. OF 2017


WITH


WITH


IN THE MATTER OF:


VERSUS


APPLICATION FOR AND ONBEHALF OF THE

PETITIONER NO.01 AND 02 HEREIN IN THIS

CURATIVE PETITION CRIMINAL NAMELY OM

PRAKASH AND WIDOW ASHA RANI DEVI FOR

RECALLING THE ORDER DATED 08.09.2011

WHEREBY N.B.W WAS ISSUED PROCESS U/S 83

CR.PC. AGAINST THE PETITIONER NO.01 AND 02

BY THE SDJM COURT NO.16 UNDER THE CJM

DIVISION BEGUSARAI BIHAR AND FOR

CANCELLATION OF NON-BAILABLE WARRANT AND

FOR QUASHING OF CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS IN

COMPLAINT CASE NO.5591 OF 2013 U/S 498A

To




abovenamed.



Article 32 of the Constitution of India is

being filed to enforce the Rights under

Article 21 of the Constitution of India

with Writ Petition Criminal 136 of 2016

and Writ Petition Civil 90 of 2016;

whereby an offence of perjury has been

committed by Ld. CJM division Begusarai

Court Bihar and Praveen Kumar(IDAS) CMD of

Indian Drugs and Pharmaceuticals Ltd, New

Delhi; Mentioning officer and Registrar

Misc. of Supreme Court of India has

violated the rules as laid down in the

Handbook of Supreme Court of India,

stopped the petitioner to mention the


India’s court, closed the door of Hon’ble

the Chief Justice of India’s court,


03.10.2016 for urgent mentioning before

Hon’ble the Chief Justice of India’s Court

in its office report, circulated an

application for Constitution bench

unregistered; spoiled the ground of

Constitution bench and pushed the


intentionally; on the other hand two

judges’ bench of this Hon’ble Court has

evaded the Rule of Law under Order XXXVIII

of Supreme Court Rule 2013 by dismissing

the Writ petition 136 of 2016 with liberty

while the petition raised substantial

question of law as to the interpretation

of the Constitution required and to be

decided by a division court of not less

than five judges; closed the door of this

Hon’ble Court for the petitioner forever;

protected and shielded the bad elements of

State Apparatus; and harassed, offended

and victimized the petitioner no.01 and 02

which would have far reaching

consequences against the interest of

public at large and against the right

of Senior Citizen Woman in particular

and would shake the public confidence

by reason of the association or

closeness of judge with the subject


precedent of procedural Judicial

system, encourage malfunctioning of the

State Apparatus; weaken the basic

fabric of the institutions; ignore

constitutional priority; which has

caused gross injustice, violated the

principle of natural justice, ignored

the principle of ex debito justitiae

and resulted in gross miscarriage of

justice.

2. That the N.B.W dated 08.09.2011 process

u/s 83 Cr.Pc. in case no. 5591 of 2013 u/s

498A has been issued, kept it secret and

disclosed it through RTI reply dated

27.08.2016 by the Ld. CJM cum PIO Civil

Court, Begusarai, Bihar through vide

letter no.115 dated 22.08.2016 under the

reply of question no.02 against case

no.5591 of 2013 furnished by Shri Nitin

Kaushik, S.D.J.M, Court Begusarai (True

copy of RTI reply by Ld. CJM Begusarai

dated 27.08.2016 annexed herein with this

curative petition criminal as Annexure P-

7) after the settlement of the same matter

by the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi on

23.07.2013 in MAT.APPL. NO. 7 of 2012 in

favor of petitioner on the ground of

certified copy of the same CJM division

Begusarai against case no.9P of 2010 u/s

12 of domestic violence Act and after

three SLP(C) no. 9854/2012, SLP(C) no.

9483/2013, SLP(C) no. 19073/2013 before


3. That the petitioner has also filed an

application for cancellation of FIRST


complaint no.9P of 2010 u/s 43 (12) of


Act, 2005 for setting aside order u/s 18,

19, 20, 21 and 22 through his Ld. Advocate

Shri Arun Kumar Singh, Reg. No.6255 of

1995 on 03.03.2011 before the same CJM

division Begusari court and certified copy

of the same has been filed before the Ld.

Trial Court at Dwarka court, New Delhi in

case no. HMA-700 of 2010 which later

renumbered as HMA-678 of 2010 and on the

ground of which Hon’ble High Court of

Delhi has pronounced judgment on

23.07.2013 in MAT.APPL. 7 of 2012. It is

evident from the record of all the three

SLPs filed before this Hon’ble Court.

However, this record has been erased by

the Ld. CJM division Begusarai which has

been admitted by Ld. CJM through RTI reply

dated 27.08.2016 under the reply of

question no.07 against case no. 9P of 2010

vide letter no.14 dated 23.08.2016

furnished by Shri Amit Anand, in charge of

vacant court of Shri Santosh Kumar, JM,

Begusarai.

4. That the criminal case complaint (P) no.

397C of 2011 new CIS generated No. 5591 of

2013 has been filed on 07.02.2011 and the

client of Respondent no.06 has appeared

before Ld. Trial Court at New Delhi on

09.02.2011 in case no. HMA-700 of 2010

and supplied the copy of case no. 9P of

2010 u/s 12 of domestic violence with

N.B.W issued dated 25.08.2010 and did not

supply the copy of criminal case complaint

(P) no. 397C of 2011 new CIS generated No.

5591 of 2013 u/s 498A to the Ld. Trial

Court at New Delhi with criminal intention

and managed to get issued SECOND N.B.W

dated 08.09.2011, Process u/s 83 Cr.P.C.

and continued to take dates up till now

without the Notice/Summon to the

petitioner with criminal intention.

5. That the criminal case u/s 498A is not

maintainable in the state of Bihar and is

maintainable in the South West District of

Delhi and F.I.R is to be lodged at Palam

Village Police Station, south west

district at New Delhi wherein the client

of Respondent No.06 has last resided till

15.04.2005. However, in this matter the

client of Respondent No.06 has filed a

criminal case complaint u/s 498A in the

state of Bihar after a gap of 6 years on

07.02.2011 without an F.I.R and without

police diary and without the intimation to

the petitioner no.01 and 02 as on date and

after the closure of frivolous Case No.9P

of 2010 u/s domestic violence Act which

was instituted on 30.03.2010 before the

same Ld. CJM division Begusarai.

6. That the cause of action is the same and

the jurisdictions of two states viz. Bihar

& Delhi are involved in it. The first

cause of action arose in the south west

district of Delhi and has been settled by

the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi on

23.07.2013 on the ground of certified copy

of Ld. District Court, Begusarai Bihar, in

MAT. APPL. No. 7 of 2012. Trial for the

same cause of action cannot be conducted

in the two states by two Hon’ble High

Courts at different point of time after

the settlement by one Hon’ble High Court.

7. That the jurisdiction “ground K” has been

taken at page no. 26 in Writ petition

Criminal 136 of 2016 whereby the

petitioner has averred that the

jurisdiction of the ailing petitioner is

south west district of Delhi and the

jurisdiction of petitioner’s ailing mother

is Bihar however the first cause of action

arose in the south west district of Delhi

subsequently the clarification has been

sought by the Registrar of this Hon’ble

Court dated 07.09.2016 at page no. 50 to

57 in the Writ Petition Criminal 136 of

2016.

8. That the criminal proceeding has taken

place in the state of Bihar because of

dismissal of all SLP(C) no. 9854/2012,

SLP(C) no. 9483/2013, SLP(C) no.

19073/2013 of the petitioner by this

Hon’ble Court which has encouraged the

morale of bad elements of State Apparatus

in Bihar as well as in Delhi. 498A is the

outcome of this encouragement.

9. That Ld. CJM has admitted in his RTI reply

dated 27.08.2016 that case no. 9P of 2010

u/s 12 of domestic violence Act is not

pending before the Ld. CJM division

Begusarai through the reply dated

22.08.2016 furnished by Shri Ravish Kumar,

O/C SDJM, Begusarai. How 498A can be


violence under the same Ld. CJM division?

10. That the Petitioner did raise

‘substantial question of law through

interlocutory application for constitution

bench dated 18.10.2016 in Writ Petition

Criminal 136 of 2016 before this Hon’ble

Court as to the interpretation of the

Constitution is required into this

petition and two-judge bench was not

required to decide any ‘interlocutory and

miscellaneous application’ ‘connected with

the petition’ as per the Order XXXVIII of

Supreme Court Rule 2013.

11. That from the record it appears that

498A has been instituted with criminal

intention to kill the petitioner no.01 &

02 evading the rule of law and N.B.W

process u/s 83 Cr.Pc. has been issued to

humiliate and usurp the property of

petitioner no.02.

PRAYER



(a) Recall and cancel the order dated 08.09.2011

whereby Non-Bail able Warrant process u/s 83

Cr.Pc. issued against petitioner no.01 and 02

namely Shri Om Prakash and Widow Asha Rani

Devi by SDJM court no.16, CJM division,

Begusarai Bihar in case no. 5591 of 2013 u/s

498A.

(b) Quash the criminal proceedings against

complaint case no.397C of 2011 CIS Reg. no.

5591 of 2013 u/s 498A/323 of IPC & u/s 3/4 of

D.P. Act pending before the Shri Nitin

Kaushik, S.D.J.M Court no.16 Begusarai, Bihar

under the judicature of Patna High Court.

(c) Pass such other order/orders as this

Hon'ble Court may deem just and proper in the

facts and circumstances of the case.

DRAWN & FILED BY:


OM PRAKASH

NEW DELHI:

FILED ON : 18.01.2017.




WITH


WITH


IN THE MATTER OF:


VERSUS


AFFIDAVIT










08.09.2011 process u/s 83 Cr.Pc. against Shri

Om Prakash Poddar and Ms Asha Devi issued by

the S.D.J.M court no.16, CJM division Begusarai

and quashing of criminal proceedings u/s 498A

in complaint case no. 5591 of 2013 pending

before the same CJM division Begusarai, which

has been drafted by me [para 01 to 11.], [Page

264 to 274] and I, As. and having understood

the contents thereof I say that the facts state


official record.

3. That the accompanying application for

cancellation of N.B.W dated 08.09.2011 and

quashing of criminal proceedings u/s 498A total

11 pages.’

DEPONENT

VERIFICATION:





therefrom.


January, 2017.

DEPONENT