Courts – Speed Defamation Trial

Researcher view not our view. 

Courts – Speed Defamation Trial, 6 Yr Torture 66A Case

October11, 2017 (C) Ravinder Singh progressindia2015@gmail.com

Honorable CJI should take note of the fact that Indian Judiciary is not Corrupted & Scandalized. 

What is Common Between CMM CMM Shri SV Gadvi against ‘The Wire’ and CMM Shri Sumit Dass 244/EOW-DP 2011 against ‘Ravinder Singh’ is that in both cases –

 

1.   Allegations with Evidence by Whistle Blowers are not being investigated?  

2.   Criminal Cases are Instituted ‘U/S 66A’ Earlier in 2011 and ‘Defamations Sections in The Wire Case in 2017.’

 

Ø In aiding Ruling Politicians launch SPEEDY DEFAMATION TRIALS as happened in Gujarat where Top Law Officer of the State was assisting an ‘Alleged Accused’ of Crony Capitalism.

 

Ø And in Systematic Torture of Whistle Blower Experts – WIPO Awarded Inventor For 6 Years & 7 months who had regularly petitioned to GoI including Honorable President of India & Prime Minister of India since 1980 matters like Corrupted allocation of OIL & Gas blocks to RIL & GSPC, that caused Economic Loss worth $Trillions.

 

Ø 2 Years and 6 months TRIAL under DEAD 66A Case in CMM Court No.4 of Patiala House.

 

Ø Actually first appearance of the ‘Accused’ was on April02, 2015 long time after the 66A section was ‘Repealed’ by honorable Supreme Court. Last date was July01, 2017.

 

Ø In 2 Years & 6 months since Summons were served, Public Prosecutor appeared only once but PP didn’t ‘TALK’ or Never Submitted any ‘REJOINDER’ – When I complained MM Shri Sumit Dass asked IO to urgently bring PP. When he Came – I told Ld MM that  

‘Sir I am the First Complainant to the President in Nov2011, about False Political Statements when Complainant was holding Public Assignments as Member of Parliament & Chairman of Parliamentary Committee. But PP didn’t investigate My Complaint which was about failure of RIL & GSPC failing to develop Oil & Gas since award of 28+65 Oil & Gas Blocks in 1999. Had they commercialized Oil & Gas – India would have saved $200b Energy – Oil & Gas, Coal and Fertilizer EVERY YEAR.’ $2 Trillion Plus Loss – if we go by Claims made by RIL in 2002.

 

Ø 66A Complainant didn’t come to the Court to Establish his Case even for a second.

 

Ø This is Hot Political Issue today – Petrol & Diesel prices are more than 2011, when Crude Petroleum cost $110 per barrel to $50 per barrel in 2016 when court was hearing the matter.

 

Ø This Petitioner was DELIBERATELY Harassed from December03, 2011 to July01, 2017.

 

Ø There was no Defamation Case against BJP and its Spokesperson for DELIBERATE PUBLIC & CALL OF REVOLT in 2011.

 

Ø BUT LOSS MAKING COMPANIES ARE ‘SPEEDILY SEEKING Rs.100 Cr DAMAGES.’

 

Ø Loss Making Companies had not PUBLISHED FACTS or Rejoinders in any media.

 

REMEDY

 

1.    In All Political Matters and Allegations of Corruption be ‘Administered By Supreme Court When Amount Exceed Rs.1,000 Cr and Lower Value in Delhi High Court to Safeguard Public Interest.’

 

2.    and Civil case should be FIRST BE CONFIRMED before Criminal Defamation Trial.

Ravinder Singh, Inventor & Consultant, INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGIES AND PROJECTS

Y-77, Hauz Khas, ND -110016, India. Ph: 091- 8826415770 [4G]9871056471, 9718280435,

Ravinder Singh* is a WIPO awarded inventor specializing in Power, Transportation,

Smart Cities, Water, Energy Saving, Agriculture, Manufacturing, Technologies and Projects

https://www.outlookindia.com/website/story/ahmedabad-court-adjourns-hearing-of-defamation-case-filed-by-jay-shah-over-the-w/302896

Ahmedabad Court Adjourns Hearing Of Defamation Case Filed By Jay Shah Over The Wire Article

A lawyer for Jay Shah sought time from Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate S K Gadhvi, saying senior advocate S V Raju could not be present in the court as he was busy in the high court.

A metropolitan court here today adjourned the hearing of the criminal defamation case filed by BJP president Amit Shah’s son Jay against news portal ‘The Wire’ as the complainant’s advocate was not present in the court.

A lawyer for Jay Shah sought time from Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate S K Gadhvi, saying senior advocate S V Raju could not be present in the court as he was busy in the high court.

The court granted the time and adjourned the hearing to October 16.

Jay Shah had filed a criminal defamation case in a metropolitan court against the news portal on Monday over a report, which claimed his firm Temple Enterprise’s turnover grew exponentially after the BJP came to power at the Centre in 2014.

The magistrate had ordered a court inquiry in the matter under CrPC section 202 (to inquire into the case to decide whether or not there is sufficient ground for proceeding).

In his application, Shah prayed for “criminal action against the respondents for defaming and tarnishing the reputation of the complainant through an article, which is scandalous, frivolous, misleading, derogatory, libelous and consisting of several defamatory statements”.

The seven respondents in the case are – the author of the article, Rohini Singh, founding editors of the news portal Siddarth Varadarajan, Sidharth Bhatia and M K Venu, managing editor Monobina Gupta, public editor Pamela Philipose and Foundation for Independent Journalism, a non-profit company that publishes ‘The Wire’.

The case seeks action against respondents under IPC sections 500 (defamation), 109 (abetment), 39 (voluntarily causing grievous hurt) and 120 B (criminal conspiracy). Shah said the news portal first published an article, which was later “edited and reworded” to the current form.

“The accused conspired to get a fabricated, reworded and edited version of the defamatory article to be published in place of the original version,” he said.

Alleging that there was a “predetermined conspiracy hatched to defame” him, Shah said he was given “unreasonable time to respond” and no further inquiry based on his response was made.

He said the article did not reflect the loss that his company incurred in FY 2015-16, and that the net profit and gross turnover for the said financial year was “wilfully and malafidely” delinked into two different unconnected paragraphs.

The court is of the opinion that it will issue summonses to the respondents only after the initial inquiry establishes a case.

Shah is yet to file a civil defamation suit against the respondents. He had earlier announced that he will also file a Rs.100 crore civil defamation suit.

A political storm has erupted after the article, titled ‘Golden touch of Jay Amit Shah’, was published.

The Congress has demanded an inquiry into the matter and ouster of Amit Shah, while the BJP called the article defamatory.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s