Another Factor that has been seen about the Judiciary is that most Judges think very low of the Litigants appearing in Person more particularly when he is not having a law degree. they seem to think that such a litigants are uninformed about the law when on facts they are much more or equally as informed as the Advocates who Practice in Court.
They for the Purpose of dissuading such Litigants have created a unique Modus operandi of appointing a Amicus Currie or a friend of the court who speaks exactly opposite the Litigants Case which causes miscarriage of justice. This writer is in Possession of evidence to that effect. As pointed in the earlier post though there are in existence many laws to prevent the abuse of power by a judge they are conveniently been overlooked for personal benefit. I would like to ask such members of the Judiciary what right has been given under the Constitution to overlook those laws.
to be Continued................
Sunday, October 24, 2010
Thursday, October 14, 2010
Expose of The Indian Judiciary
While it May be Said that there are a Few good Judges in the Indian Judiciary. I have no Hesitation in Saying that Most are Corrupt. By This I Mean Not the normal Definition of the Word Corrupt but as having an attitude of alleged Superiority viz a viz the Common Man. It is often quoted by them that One Cannot be a Judge of once Own Case or that One May grow to a high office but is not above the Law.
But When it Comes to the aspect of Judging their own Conduct. They Maintain that they are the Best Persons to Judge their own Conduct or that of a colleague. They Have Assured the Legislatures in that Regard That they will Truth fully and Honestly Judge The Conduct of their colleague. But In Reality have They Done So? No I say The Judgments In the Contempt of Court Particularly in respect of the Conduct of a Judge of the High Court or The Supreme Court The Judges Have Shown Bias and active interest in Protecting the Colleague. I say That though It is undoubtedly true That under Provisions of the Constitution a Judge of the High Court or The Supreme Court can not be removed from office unless There is decision of at least 2/3 Members of the Legislature. The Same cannot be a Ground to Hold That They are not entitled to decide a case of Contempt of Court against their Own Colleague More so When the Constitution as well as The Law of Contempt empowers Them to Do So. They have Pronounced Judgments that go to Negate the Law by Misquoting the Provisions for their removal. This Aspect is Also True When a Case Of Contempt is Taken out Against an Advocate by a Litigant. It is Often Seen that such a Litigant is Victimized under the very Law. To Cite an Example the Arundhati Roy Case Wherein she was held guilty of Contempt. The said case shows total Disregard to the Peoples rights Where they were rendered homeless under guise of government requirement. I would like to ask those Judges How would you feel if you were rendered Homeless and live on the roads or temporary shelters albeit for a temporary period of say 2 or 3 years till the Government provides a alternate house.
...........................To Be Continued
But When it Comes to the aspect of Judging their own Conduct. They Maintain that they are the Best Persons to Judge their own Conduct or that of a colleague. They Have Assured the Legislatures in that Regard That they will Truth fully and Honestly Judge The Conduct of their colleague. But In Reality have They Done So? No I say The Judgments In the Contempt of Court Particularly in respect of the Conduct of a Judge of the High Court or The Supreme Court The Judges Have Shown Bias and active interest in Protecting the Colleague. I say That though It is undoubtedly true That under Provisions of the Constitution a Judge of the High Court or The Supreme Court can not be removed from office unless There is decision of at least 2/3 Members of the Legislature. The Same cannot be a Ground to Hold That They are not entitled to decide a case of Contempt of Court against their Own Colleague More so When the Constitution as well as The Law of Contempt empowers Them to Do So. They have Pronounced Judgments that go to Negate the Law by Misquoting the Provisions for their removal. This Aspect is Also True When a Case Of Contempt is Taken out Against an Advocate by a Litigant. It is Often Seen that such a Litigant is Victimized under the very Law. To Cite an Example the Arundhati Roy Case Wherein she was held guilty of Contempt. The said case shows total Disregard to the Peoples rights Where they were rendered homeless under guise of government requirement. I would like to ask those Judges How would you feel if you were rendered Homeless and live on the roads or temporary shelters albeit for a temporary period of say 2 or 3 years till the Government provides a alternate house.
...........................To Be Continued
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
