Is Law subservient to VVIPs
Mera Bharat Mahan "You cannot get your property back by way of Law"
Operation 19.2.13 : "ls Law subservient to VVIP'S"
Khedi Pul Faridabad Police in liaison with area Patwari Sh. Jagdish on orders of President Tribunal Maintenance , Farìdabad u/s 22 of act 2007 protection of life and property of senior citizen conducted operation 19/2 .
See orders of Tribunal President and District Social Welfare Officer regarding removal of illegal encroachment by Gayatri Devi.
Operation is in parts :
- Compliance of law-ful orders of Tribunal President
- Compliance of orders of VVIP's superseding Law
- Ongoing battle with Land Mafia in court
- After due deliberations , President Tribunal Maintenance , Mr SushiI Sarwan in consultation with Tribunal Members and Police passed orders on 10.1.13 to remove encroachment by 13.2.13 . Local police busy in VVIP duties could find time to act on orders on 19/2/13 i.e. one month nine days later.
- On 19/2 Police force under Khedì Pul Chowki I/c and area Patwari informed Gayatri Devi to obey law, remove animals tied up in-side illegally by breaking Walls of plot . Gayatri turned violent and she assaulted owner of plot in front of police and other people . She turned utterly lunatic , dis-shelved , fully soaked in mud , clothes torn . She was restrained by people nearby and then forcibly taken in custody by lady police present and taken to Police Chowki in PCR by lady police for detention and to be charged u/s 107 breach of peace , 150 design to commit cognizable offense .
- Mean-time Police evicted animals from plot , hurriedly took signatures from people around that encroachment removed and departed to carry out further orders of VVIP's to nullify Tribunal President's orders which they just now un-willingly implemented .
- In 2 hours plot owner with help of other people barricaded the broken gate entrance and deployed people to guard premises and proceeded to Police Chowki to witness VVIP's orders taking shape.
- Hours later, Gayatri who was detained by Police, was present in Police Chowki in clean clothes , calm , poised , fearless , assured , waiting for next move .
- Plot owner was asked to lodge complaint against her which was corrected by police three times .
- As soon as plot owner left police chowki, Gayatri was escorted back home respectfully where her devils had arrived. They assaulted men guarding premises , set fire to barricading , re-encroached .
- Police was immediately alerted by the owner and other people when rampaging was in progress but police expressed their helplessness .
This was the second time police had deliberately failed to implement law-ful orders .
Earlier on 14.10.11 the then Tribunal President Sh.Yash Pal Yadav issued same orders and summoned SHO to his office to ensure orders are carried, but to no avail.
Under the given circumstances on 21.2.13 owner has filed an application u/s 145 and 146 CrPC i.e. in the interest of peace , court to sea! up premises.
Yet there is no response.
The learned lawyer Mr. Sunil's assertion "you cannot get your property back by way of law" is true to its last letter.
- Gayatri Devi filed an appeal on 20.2.13 before Appellate Authority District Magistrate Fbd. against the orders of the President Tribunal to evict illegal encroachment. While the appeal was pending before the District Magistrate , her lawyers filed a civil writ petition No.4636 of 2013 in Chandigarh High Court titled "Gayatri Devi vs State of Haryana and ors" challenging orders of President Tribunal , concealing the fact an appeal is pending before the Dist. Magistrate. This is a punishable offence u/s 195 Cr.P.C. on part of Gayatri Devi.
- High Court Chandigarh , on 4.3.2013 issued ex-parte stay on Tribunal's orders un-aware that appeal is pending before the District Magistrate.
- District Magistrate on 7.5.13, un-aware of High Court ex-parte stay, up-held Tribunal's orders.
- In High Court proceedings , the petitioner Gayatri Devi never appeared. Her legal counsels were presenting false fabricated evidence on her behalf . State of Haryana , the main respondent never replied to petition and never appeared before the High Court. Respondent No.3 Mohinder Nath Mehta was baffled by the proceedings. It was extremely hard to place concrete evidence of criminal activities of land mafia before the High Court. It was free field for mafia . No arguments in defense put forward by respondents.
- It was assumed by all that the case is lost and the mafia is supreme.
- How-ever High Court judgement has surprised many . Justice Ms Ritu Bahri in-spite of mafia dominated proceedings , has painstakingly gone through every word of evidence placed by the 3rd respondent and arrived at judgement on 5.8.2014 dismissing mafia's case.
- High Court judgement , even though dismissing mafia case, will remain short of objective until there is appropriate deterrent against mafia.
Dist Court Judge Ms Neha Goyal CJJD passed judgement on 16.12.2013 in Gayatri's suit that she is tenant since 1996. The judgement clearly high-lights that it is land mafia operation and simply dismisses the suit without any kind of deterrence against land mafia, no orders to evict illegal encroachment or impose cost for false fabricated suit.
A complaint to Police dated 11.5.2011 ,with serious allegations on defendant Mohinder Nath Mehta intends to kill Gayatri Devi , was placed on records of Court file probably by Gayatri's legal counsel advocate M.S.Bainsla.
During Court proceedings , Gayatri Devi deposed before the Judge that she is not aware of any such Police complaint. Police in RTI reply regarding this complaint has stated "No such complaint received from Gayatri Devi"
Incidentally mafia attempted to kidnap defendant on 28.5.2011. Was complaint dated 11.5.2011 a prelude to kidnap attempt or some other mafia plan to kill Gayatri and implicate defendant Mohinder Nath Mehta.
Like-wise Gayatri deposed before the Judge Ms Navjeet Klair CJJD " I was present in criminal case before Judge Sh Mohit Aggarwal on 15.10.2011 arranging bail surety of a co-accused Hoshiar Singh at a time when arrest warrants were also issued against me and I should also have been arrested"
Such kind of incriminating evidence is simply buried in Court files. Why should criminals fear law?