कोर्ट फिक्सर में प्रशांत भूषण व इंदिरा जय सिंह और अरुणा राय से लेकर माफिया डाॅन दाउद का गुर्गा भी शामिल?

सुप्रीम कोर्ट के मुख्य न्यायधीश रंजन गोगोई पर लगे यौन शोषण के आरोप के बाद सुप्रीम कोर्ट का तिलस्म टूटने लगा है। जनता में सुप्रीम कोर्ट की विश्वसनीयता दांव पर है। असल में मुख्य न्यायधीश की आड़ में कोर्ट फिक्सरों ने जो खेल खेला है, वह इस देश की न्यायपालिका को बंधक बनाने का प्रयास है। एक वकील UTSAV SINGH BAINS  ने इसे बड़े कारपोरेट घराने और दाउद गिरोह के सबसे बड़े कोर्ट फिक्सर की साजिश करार दिया है। अदालत में उसने शपथ पत्र दाखिल किया है और उसके इस आरोप की सत्यता की जांच के लिए Justice A K Patnaik कमेटी का गठन किया गया है। यह कमेटी मुख्य न्यायधीश पर लगे यौन शोषण मामले की जांच नहीं करेगी, बल्कि इस वकील उत्सव बैंस के दावों की जांच करेगी।

इस पूरे मामले को समझाता संदीप देव का यूट्यूब लाइव वीडियो-1

पेश है उत्सव बैंस के शपथ का मुख्य बिंदू….

More Read

मुख्य न्यायाधीश के घर पहुंचे प्रधानमंत्री। मचा बवाल!

कन्हैयालाल के हत्यारोपियों को एक के बाद एक जमानत! NIA की जांच संदेह के घेरे में!

‘स्त्रीधन’ की इकलौती मालकिन है महिला, पिता उसे वापस करने की नहीं कर सकते मांग : सुप्रीम कोर्ट

मुंबई कॉलेज ने अदालत से कहा हिजाब पर रोक ‘ड्रेस कोड’ का हिस्सा, मुसलमानों के खिलाफ नहीं ! 

AFFIDAVIT of Adv Utsav Singh Bains

I, Utsav Singh Bains, the Deponent, do hereby solemnly state and affirm as under:

1. That I am a practicing advocate at the Supreme Court of India and being familiar with the facts and circumstances of the case, I am competent to swear this Affidavit.
2. That, the Deponent wishes to bring to notice of the Hon’ble Court a serious matter of a conspiracy to make the Chief Justice of India resign by framing him in a false case of sexual harassment.
3. That at around 5 pm on 4thApril 2019, an unknown person came to meet the Deponent at his office.
4. That, the person named himself Ajay and claimed to be a relative of a lady who has since become a complainant against the Hon’ble Chief Justice of India (CJI).
5. That, the person said that he wanted the Deponent to pro-bono represent the said complainant who had made allegations of sexual harassment against the Hon’ble Chief Justice of India. The said Ajay told the Deponent that he approached the Deponent as the Deponent has appeared for sexual assault survivors on a pro-bono basis in the past and that he had seen the Deponent appear on television during many television debates regarding sexual abuse of children and women.
6. That, the said Ajay narrated in Hindi language that the said complainant was working as a staff member of the Hon’ble CJI and alleged that the Hon’ble Chief Justice of India had sexually assaulted her at his residence.
7. That, the said Ajay further claimed that the Hon’ble CJI had persecuted the said complainant and her family. The said Ajay wanted the Deponent to pro-bono represent the said complainant as her lawyer and organize a press conference at the Press Club of India to make those allegations public.
8. That, the person then praised the Deponent’s pro-bono work as a lawyer for the survivors of sexual assault in high-profile cases.
9. That the Deponent was shocked to hear the allegations and was willing to represent the said complainant but when the said Ajay further narrated the entire sequence of events and facts of the case, the Deponent was not convinced and found several loopholes in the said Ajay’s version of events.
10. That, when the Deponent asked the said Ajay to arrange a meeting with the said complainant, the said Ajay offered to organize a Vakalatnama and affidavit signed by the said complainant. However, the said Ajay was neither prepared to bring the complainant to the office of the Deponent nor to connect her to the Deponent to answer material questions.
11. That, when the Deponent asked the said Ajay as to what was his relationship with the said complainant, the said Ajay gave evasive and vague responses.
12. That, the interaction between the Deponent and the said Ajay made it clear to the said Ajay that the Deponent was not interested to represent the said complainant without directly meeting with her as the Deponent was not convinced and found several loopholes in the said Ajay’s version of events. It was then that the said Ajay changed his track suddenly and from a request for a pro-bono representation, directly offered the Deponent a bribe of Rs 50 lakh to represent the said complainant and also to organize a press conference.
13. That, when the Deponent outright refused the said bribe of Rs 50 lakh offered by the said Ajay to frame the Hon’ble Chief Justice of India, the said Ajay then increased the sum to Rs 1.5 crore to the Deponent following which the Deponent asked him to immediately leave his office.
14. That, the Deponent then met various reliable persons to enquire about the allegations, who gave the Deponent credible information on the condition of anonymity. That, these are listed herein-below.
15. That, the Deponent was informed by reliable sources that certain ‘Fixers’, who claim to be engaged in illegally managing Judgements in exchange for cash are behind this plot as the Hon’ble CJI has taken decisive action to crack down on such fixers.
16. That, in the beginning of the Deponent’s informal enquiry, every source the Deponent met had only the knowledge of a conspiracy against the Hon’ble CJI but not the names of the persons involved in hatching and executing the said conspiracy.
17. That on 19thApril, 2019, a very reliable person, strictly on the condition of anonymity and in good faith, informed the Deponent about a corporate figure who tried to approach a Hon’ble Supreme Court judge to get a favourable order in a high-profile case listed before this Hon’ble Court but was unsuccessful and then the said corporate figure attempted to get the case transferred from the court of that Hon’ble Supreme Court judge but did not succeed and thus ganged up with an alleged fixer by the name of Romesh Sharma and his aides to frame the Hon’ble Chief Justice of India in a false case of sexual harassment to pressurize him to resign.
18. That the person further informed the Deponent that after targeting the Hon’ble Chief Justice of India, the Hon’ble Supreme Court judge mentioned above is the next target of this gang of Fixers and the above mentioned Corporate figure and will be soon framed in a controversy to force him to resign as well because the above mentioned Corporate figure incurred huge losses due to the Judgement passed by the above mentioned Hon’ble Supreme Court judge.
19. That, the source told the Deponent that Romesh Sharma also ganged up with disgruntled employees and former employees of the Supreme Court, who actively conspired to frame the Hon’ble Chief Justice of India in the sexual harassment complaint.
20. That it is pertinent to mention here that the Deponent is privy to certain events involving the said corporate figure and will submit in a sealed cover the events and list of the involved persons to this Hon’ble Court should it so direct him.
21. That the deponent was further informed by the person about the failed attempts of Jet Airways owner Naresh Goyal to bribe the Hon’ble Chief Justice of India through the said fixer Romesh Sharma to give a favorable order to Jet Airways and to order the Government to waive off its losses.
22. That, the same source stated that the said fixer Romesh Sharma was introduced to Naresh Goyal by 1993 Bombay Bomb Blast Mastermind and United Nations Security Council designated Terrorist Dawood Ibrahim.
23. That the source showed the Deponent credible and incriminating reports by Indian Intelligence agencies proving that Dawood Ibrahim had invested money in Jet Airways and that the Delhi based Romesh Sharma was a close aide of Dawood Ibrahim.
24. That, It is also pertinent to mention here, that the Deponent further enquired into the claims and found the story to be true and secret documents of Intelligence agencies in custody of some Delhi-based journalists, which clearly establish that Dawood Ibrahim had invested huge sum of money in the Jet Airways.
25. That, the Deponent was further informed that the said fixer Romesh Sharma was running a ‘Cash for Judgement’ racket in cahoots with businessmen and politicians and had exercised considerable influence for years, which ultimately was brought to an end by the present Chief Justice of India when he took over the office and took decisive actions against such Fixers.
26. That furthermore the reliable source informed the Deponent that Romesh Sharma had hatched this conspiracy along with other Fixers like him and he was the Delhi Kingpin of the ‘Cash for Judgement Fixers Club’.
27. That, the Deponent was informed that the said fixer Romesh Sharma wanted the Hon’ble Chief Justice of India to resign as he was facing huge losses worth hundreds of crores since he was unable to get favorable orders for the highest bidder.
28. That, on 19 April 2019, when the Deponent was informed by a reliable source about the links of Romesh Sharma with Dawood Ibrahim and Naresh Goyal and the above mentioned Corporate Figure, the Deponent realized that the conspiracy was of a very serious nature and felt it is his duty as an Officer of the Court under the Advocates Act to inform the Hon’ble CJI of the conspiracy.
29. That, the Deponent upon learning about the said links of the said fixer Romesh Sharma with Naresh Goyal and Dawood Ibrahim and the above mentioned Corporate Figure and understanding the larger conspiracy to frame the Hon’ble CJI, immediately rushed to the residence of the Chief Justice of India, and reached outside the Hon’ble CJI’s residence around 7 pm on 19thApril, 2019. The Deponent did not know any other avenue of approaching the Hon’ble CJI nor who else to approach considering the sensitivity of the matter.
30. That, the Deponent requested the staff of the Hon’ble CJI for an audience with the Hon’ble CJI but they told the Deponent that the Hon’ble CJI was not at his residence.
31. That, the Deponent later during the same evening contacted a Supreme Court reporter and asked him to get a message sent to Hon’ble CJI or arrange a meeting and asked him to meet him the next day.
32. That on the next day, viz 20thApril 2019, the Deponent read media reports about the allegations made against the Hon’ble Chief Justice of India.
33. That, the Deponent has filed this affidavit in the capacity of being an Officer of the Court under the Advocates Act as well as a conscientious citizen of the country.
34. That, the Deponent will not share any names of the sources mentioned herein under any circumstances as these were Privileged Communications under the Advocates Act.
35. That, the Deponent is aware that his life will come under imminent danger after filing of this affidavit due to the established connections of Romesh Sharma and Naresh Goyal with Dawood Ibrahim.
36. That the Deponent has been informed that he might be killed in a planned road accident or poisoned by untraceable poison or killed in a way that the murder will look like a plain accident or be framed in a false case of Rape etcetera to tarnish his image by those who will be hurt by the Deponent for speaking the truth and exposing them.
37. That the Deponent is filing this affidavit in the larger interest of the Judiciary and for its independence.
38. That the Deponent will find it an honor to suffer any consequences in the larger interest of the Judiciary’s independence but will not disclose the names of the true patriots who have shared the information in good faith and under strict confidence on promise of confidentiality.
39. That the chain of events and the information learnt by the Deponent has led the Deponent to believe that the independence of the Judiciary is today under a very serious attack and that the sexual harassment complaint is a organized conspiracy against the Chief Justice of India to force him to resign and thereby threaten every Judge with dire consequences for being free and fearless in dispensing Justice while pronouncing Judgements against the rich and powerful in the country.
40. That the Deponent affirms that the Deponent has no personal, pecuniary or professional interest in this matter whatsoever.
41. That the Deponent has limited resources and has conducted whatsoever enquiry that was possible as an Officer of the Court under the Advocates Act and states that no relevant facts in his knowledge have been withheld except the information mentioned in para 17 hereinabove which will be submitted in a sealed cover If so directed by this Hon’ble Court.
42. That the Deponent has through this affidavit passed on whatever information was made available to him from various reliable sources so as to provide a larger picture to this Hon’ble Court.
43. That the Deponent has tried to the best of his ability to verify the said information made available to him by the various sources mentioned herinabove.
44. That the Deponent merely wishes that all of the information should come to the knowledge of this Hon’ble Court so that it can have the same probed and the independence of the Judiciary be protected under all circumstances.
45. That the matter is of a sensitive nature and cannot be probed by any subordinate agency without direct judicial supervision since it concerns the independence of the Judiciary and directly relates to a conspiracy to undermine the topmost office in the Indian judiciary.
46. That keeping this in mind, the deponent did not approach any investigating agency with these details but has approached this Hon’ble Court in good faith so that it may be probed without fear, favour or pressure of any kind.
47. That, an Independent Judicial Enquiry is the need of the hour in this case.

इससे पहले कोर्ट फिक्सरों के पक्ष में अदालत से बाहर के वो बड़े फिक्सर एक जुट होकर सामने आ गये जो वामपंथी विचारधारा के हैं। लुटियन्स दिल्ली का यह जमात चुनी हुई सरकार को गिराने से लेकर देश के मुख्य न्यायधीश तक को हटाने की साजिश करने वालों में शामिल है। यह वह वर्ग है जो अंतरराष्ट्रीय पुरस्कार और फंडिंग एजेंसियों के साथ मिलकर देश को बंधक बनाने का कुचक्र रचता रहता है। उनके नाम और उनके लिखित बयान जो अदालत में भेजे गये हैं, वह देखिए तो समझ जाएंगे कि सुप्रीम कोर्ट के अंदर और बाहर से कोर्ट-फिक्सर किस तरह से भारत की न्यायपालिका का अपहरण करने की साजिश में लिप्त हैं….

Statement seeking independent inquiry into allegations of sexual harassment and victimisation against the Chief Justice of India

We are extremely concerned to note the complaint of sexual harassment and victimisation made by a woman employee of the Supreme Court against the Chief Justice of India. The charges are prima facie serious enough to warrant an independent inquiry by a high level independent committee.

The complaint also alleges arbitrary actions taken against the complainant, resulting in unprecedented victimisation that she and her family have been put through and continue to suffer after she rejected the alleged sexual advances. These include, the unjust termination of the services of the complainant, the suspension from service of her husband and two brothers-in-law, and her arrest on an apparently motivated FIR.

The act of the Chief Justice of India to constitute a special bench headed by himself to hear this issue on the judicial side, rather than constituting a credible and independent inquiry committee, goes against all just and settled principles of law. In the hearing, one-sided allegations were made by the Chief Justice and senior most law officers of the government. This is unbecoming of a judicial proceeding, especially one where the complainant in a sexual harassment case is absent and is permitted to be openly vilified in court. These actions augur a dark day in the history of the Supreme Court and have, undoubtedly, cast a shadow on the credibility of the Chief Justice and the judiciary.

We, therefore, call upon all the judges of the Supreme Court to  ensure that an independent and credible inquiry committee comprising senior retired judges and eminent members of civil society, headed by a woman, is immediately set up to inquire into this complaint.

It is imperative that the complainant be granted protection, so that her safety and security is ensured. In the meantime, since many of the witnesses named by the complainant are officials of the Supreme Court registry, it is incumbent on the Chief Justice to refrain from exercising any administrative powers during the course of the inquiry, since it would not be reasonable to expect officials under his direct administrative control to depose fearlessly.

This is a moment of grave crisis for the judiciary. If the Court is unable to credibly deal with this challenge, public confidence in the judiciary will be severely eroded.

Endorsed by:

Medha Patkar, Arundhati Roy, Aruna Roy, Kamla Bhasin, Bezwada Wilson, Yogendra Yadav, Kalpana Kannabiran, Harsh Mander, Syeda Hameed, P. Sainath, Kavita Kuruganti, Dipa Sinha, Annie Raja, Anjali Bhardwaj, Nikhil Dey, Prabhat Patnaik, Aakar Patel, Shabnam Hashmi, Kamal Jaswal, Amitabh Behar, Paul Divakar, Maj Gen S.G.Vombatkere, Kavita Srivastava, Arundhati, Dhuru, Vipul Mudgal, Amrita Johri, Meera Sanghamitra, Abha Bhaiya, Himshi Singh, Basant Hetamsaria, Suhas Kolhekar, Annie Namala and Uma.

इस पूरे मामले को समझाता संदीप देव का यूट्यूब लाइव वीडियो-2