Current Issue
Organiser Home
Editorial
EXPOSE
Reports
Comment
The Moving Finger Writes
Media Watch
Thinking Aloud
Bookmark
A PAGE FROM HISTORY
RETROSPECT
Kids Org.
News Round-up
Readers’ Forum:
INTERESTING PEOPLE
PERSPECTIVE
Kerala Newsletter

Previous Issues
September 04, 2011

August 28, 2011
August 21, 2011
August 14, 2011
August 07, 2011

July 31, 2011
July 24, 2011
July 17, 2011
July 10, 2011
July 03, 2011

June 26, 2011
June 19, 2011
June 12, 2011
June 05, 2011

May 29, 2011
May 22, 2011
May 15, 2011
May 08, 2011
May 01, 2011

April 24, 2011
April 17, 2011
April 10, 2011
April 03, 2011

March 27, 2011
March 20, 2011
March 13, 2011
March 06, 2011

February 27, 2011
February 20, 2011
February 13, 2011
February 06, 2011

January 30, 2011
January 23, 2011
January 16, 2011
January 09, 2011
January 02, 2011

December 26, 2010
December 19, 2010
December 12, 2010
December 05, 2010
November 28, 2010
November 21, 2010
November 14, 2010
November 7, 2010

October 31, 2010
October 24, 2010
October 17, 2010
October 10, 2010
October 03, 2010

2010 Issues
2009 Issues
2008 Issues
2007 Issues
2006 Issues

Organiser
About us
Advertisement
Circulation
Contact us

Subscribe


November 28, 2010




Page: 4/43

Home > 2010 Issues > November 28, 2010

Indresh Kumar serves legal notice to Rajasthan Home Minister Shanti Dhariwal
By Pramod Kumar

RSS National Executive Member Shri Indresh Kumar has served a legal notice to Rajasthan Home Minister Shanti Dhariwal for allegedly targeting him in the Ajmer blast case. The copies of Dhariwal’s statements on Shri Indresh Kumar published in various newspapers have also been attached with the notice. The notice was served on November 16 through advocates Shri Arun Bhardwaj and Ms Meenakshi Lekhi.

The notice said the Minister presented the Ajmer blast chargesheet in a wrong manner and his statements created pressures on the investigating agencies to change their stand. "You are acting to seek and persecute my client with complete disregard for his innocence. Any further interference with the legal process, attempt to influence investigation, distortion of facts, fabrication of evidence and making of scurrilous imputations against him will render you and everyone combining with you liable in appropriate legal proceedings. You are also obligated to undo the wrong done and the consequential damage to my client failing which you will be liable, in addition, to exemplary damages and other appropriate legal proceedings our client is entitled in law to institute against you," said the notice.

Quoting a statement of Dhariwal appeared in The Time of India on October 28, 2010 in which he said "he (Shri Indresh Kumar) gave guidelines about triggering the blast. He decided who will make the bomb, who will trigger it, who will provide the money and the mobile and who will handle the media", the notice said: Dissimulating facts you are trumping up charges against my client disguising them as legal process which is but a cloak for your political agenda and that agenda is controlling "investigation" into offences like Ajmer Blast forcing them to move in a direction which suits your political needs. In deliberately misstating and distorting the chargesheet filed in the Ajmer Blast case not only you are substituting your imagination for what is stated therein but revealing your intent to coerce the investigating agency to toe your line and thrust an offence onto our client and portray him to be an offender by any means necessary, the illegality of the same notwithstanding. This explains a statement attributed to the Chief Minister that our client will soon be called for investigation. Your intent having been revealed in your statement the so-called investigation would only be a ritual performed under your guidance there being a predisposition to hold my client culpable, the facts of the case notwithstanding. You and the Chief Minister seem oblivious and unconcerned by the fact that the investigation has culminated in a chargesheet which lists out the accused sent to trial and those against whom investigation is still pending and my client is in neither category of accused."

Quoting the chargesheet filed by Rajasthan ATS in the court the notice said: "Admittedly the investigating officer has concluded that our client is not part of any conspiracy and has no role whatsoever in it (Ajmer blast) and a bare perusal of the chargesheet itself demonstrates the absence of any link both with the object of the conspiracy and those intending to achieve it. Your statement is clearly an instance of false memory and substitutes your wish of a state of affairs for a different state of affairs which exists and in which our client has no role."

"The chargesheet refers to a meeting in Gujarati Samaj Guest house allegedly attended by our client. The chargesheet, nevertheless, contains no material whatsoever in support of the meeting aforementioned. No document or statement (which together add up to almost a 1000 pages) support, even remotely, the said extract of para 5.13 of the chargesheet. Your statement to the press makes it apparent that a reference has been made to the alleged presence of our client in the so-called meeting upon your instigation though there was nothing un-earthed in the investigation," the notice said further adding that "a bare look at the chargesheet shows that the reference to the meeting has been thrust into it dubiously and deviously and not only is there no link with the chain of events involving the conspirators-made-accused and others named, the very purpose of the so-called meeting for the professed objective was non-existent, for the reasons revealed in the chargesheet itself."

"A Pracharak of Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh and Hindu by religion, our client has always shunned both violence and fundamentalism. It is for this reason that elements of extremist fringe, who are accused in Malegaon and have been arrested elsewhere, have not only openly expressed their hostility towards him but also manifested the clear intent to eliminate him. No civilised system can be allowed to play with the lives and reputation of its own people. An allegation so grave, made in a manner so cavalier, without even a shred of evidence in support, inviting public obloquy and ridicule is ex-facie an instance of oppressive, arbitrary and unconstitutional action rendering you liable for malicious, deliberate and injurious wrongdoing. Right to reputation is recognised as a facet of the right to life guaranteed by the Constitution. Aside from other proceedings you are also liable to our client for deprivation of this right. Your liability for this breach arises in Public Law and is created by the Constitution which guarantees protection against such deprivation. The due process of law has been both shamelessly and brazenly violated by you and my client is entitled to make against you, aside from other proceedings available, a claim in public law for compensation for the injury suffered by him. Law civilises public power and assures citizens that they live under a legal system which protects their interests and preserves their rights. The office never sanctifies the holder and the instant is clearly a case of deliberate wrongdoing," the notice said.

The notice said the political interference in the investigation also became apparent in the reference made by the minister to Samjhauta Express. "It is apparent you are treating the chargesheet as an instrument of propaganda meant for address to a particular constituency only and not a legal document which has worth and sanctity outside its political purpose. Aside from the fact that the reference was unnecessary in a chargesheet dealing with Ajmer Blast the comment is different from the stated position of the Government of India as also findings of the United Nations Security Council that LeT was involved in the Samjhauta Express bombing. There is, therefore, reason to assume that this is part of a gambit with the government at the Centre, also ruled by the same political party and hence sharing the same political agenda, to give a witch-hunt the euphemism of investigation," the notice added.

Comparison of RSS with SIMI and LeT
Defamation case against Rahul Gandhi and Digvijay Singh in Indore court

A defamation case has been filed in a court of Indore against Congress general secretary Rahul Gandhi and former Chief Minister of Madhya Pradesh Digvijay Singh for comparing Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) with banned terrorist outfits SIMI and Lashkar-e-Toiba.

The case was filed by Shri Mukesh Pedwa, an RSS activist of Indore, through his advocate Shri Minesh Pandey. The court heard the preliminary statements on November 15 and postponed the matter for further hearing on November 22.

Talking to mediapersons after filing the case in Indore, Shri Pedwa said the case was filed in the court of Judicial Magistrate Shri DK Singh under IPC Sections 500 (defamation) and 153 (provocative statements). He said by comparing the nationalist organisation RSS with banned terrorist organisations Shri Digvijay Singh and Rahul Gandhi have not only attempted to defame the RSS but also hurt his feelings as he is a worker of the RSS.

It is to be noted that Digvijay Singh had sometimes back in Nagpur compared the RSS with Lashkar-e-Toiba while Rahul Gandhi in Bihar had said that he does not find any difference between the RSS and SIMI.




Previous Page Previous Page (3/43) - Next Page (5/43) Next Page


copyright© 2004 Bharat Prakashan(Delhi) Ltd. All Rights Reserved
Designed and Hosted by KSHEERAJA Web Solutions Pvt Ltd