Justice Pasayat’s conduct questioned

Justice Arijit Pasayat’s assertion that terrorists have no entitlement to human rights is condemned by human-right-activists.

Golak Bihari Nath of Gatantrik Adhikar Surakha Sangathan and Pramodini Pradhan of People’s Union for Civil Liberties in a Press realease on 14th December have questioned the motive of the former judge of the Supreme Court of India.

We publish here the contents of the Press Release with the hope that Justice Pasayat would explain his position, as his reported remark has serious ramifications.

Here is what the two have said:

The former Supreme Court Judge Justice Arijit Pashayat’s statement that terrorists and notorious criminals should not be given any human rights consideration, as reported in various newspapers, is unacceptable.

It is shocking when a former judge of the Supreme Court carries such an attitude.

His comments are in disagreement with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights to which India is a signatory. The Declaration clearly states that “Everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law in a public trial at which he has had all the guarantees necessary for his defence” (Article-11).

Right to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial judiciary is also guaranteed by the Constitution of India.

In view of this, the comment of Justice Pasayat that ‘the terrorists and notorious criminals are not entitled to any human rights consideration’ is completely against the accepted values and principles of Indian Constitution as well as the United Nations’ Charter of Human Rights.

What is worrying is when a person with such prejudice about ‘terrorists’ and ‘criminals ’occupied a position in the highest judiciary of the country, what kind of justice would have been delivered to people presumed as ‘terrorists’ and ‘criminals ’by that person.

Justice Arijit Pasayat should speak out

Subhas Chandra Pattanayak

arijit pasayatJustice Arijit Pasayat is a former Judge of the Supreme Court of India. He is a trustee of Servants of the People Society (SoPS). Under Art.32 of its Constitution, a trustee is appointed “for the better management of the assets” of SoPS and shall remain a trustee till death. The Samaja of Orissa is being used as an asset of SoPS. Therefore, Justice Pasayat is also responsible for its “better management”.

In a previous posting in these pages we have exposed how huge sums of money are being misappropriated through dubious advertisement bills by a blue-eyed boy of the SoPS, who acts as ad manager of the Samaja. He has been rewarded with an additional post of Joint General Manager.

Recently when the Additional District Magistrate of Cuttack was required by the Registrar of Newspapers for India (RNI) to enquire into legitimacy of ownership of the Samaja as it was alleged by ‘Save the Samaja Forum’ (SSF) that SoPS has illegally occupied the newspaper by using a fake WILL projected as Gopabandhu’s, a retired IAS officer S.C.Mantry parading himself as General Manager of Samaja had used Justice Pasayat’s name as a trustee in order to dazzle the officer to dance to his tune. Thus Justice Pasayat’s name and involvement with the Samaja as a trustee of SoPS is being used to influence government officers in Orissa. We wish, Justice Pasayat, being a great name in Indian Judiciary, should ascertain as to whether it was necessary to use his name in course of the ADM’s investigation into legitimacy of SoPS ownership over the Samaja.

However, he being a man of Orissa, and a trustee of SoPS whose duty it is to manage the Samaja in a “better” manner by virtue of being a trustee, and whose name is being used to derail official investigations into felony of forgery pointed out by SSF, we expect that the rampant unfair labor practices going on in the establishment of that paper, should be reacted to by him. Fro last several months, in the latest phase, the Samaja is burning under the heat of internecine battles between rival groups of members of SoPS.

It cannot be believed that Justice Pasayat has not known anything of this ongoing shenanigans in the Samaja establishment.

We want him to speak out when the most dedicated employees of the Samaja are being thrown into enforced idleness, denial of entry into workplace, false police cases, suspension, stoppage of wages, de facto dismissals, domesticated domestic enquiries, and all sorts of colorable exercise of managerial power including dismissal, over and above the nasty practice of denying labor welfare measures like provident fund, employees state insurance, house rent allowance and retirement benefits like gratuity and pension etc to dozens of employees by treating them as casual workers despite their regular discharge of duties for decades non-stop.

We want him to speak out if he is sure that the SoPS has taken over the Samaja on the basis of a genuine WILL of Pandit Gopabandhu Das, a co-founder of the paper. We have stumbled upon records that shows that the WILL the SoPS is claiming to be the basis on which it has occupied the Samaja is a forged WILL. As a trustee, we want Justice Pasayat to verify that WILL and say the public, if he finds the same to be genuine, that the WILL is genuine.

When he had headed a Committee in 2011 to enquire into various financial irregularities including misappropriation of the funds of the Samaja and various acts of misconduct and moral turpitude marked in top functionaries of the Samaja establishment and life members of SoPS, in his report he had mentioned that the “Samaja unlike other newspapers is not the property of any individual or group of persons”. And, we believe, by saying so, he meant Servants of the People Society to the that group of persons.

We want the forgery in matter of Gopabandhu’s WILL be brought to records and therefore, we want Justice Pasayat to speak out.

DGP is Apprised of Police inaction over allegations of serious crimes against SoPS

Conveners of ‘Save The Samaja Forum’, Prasanta Patnaik and Subhas Chandra Pattanayak have attracted attention of the Director General of Police Sri Prakash Mishra, while meeting him in his Bhubaneswar camp on September 28, to the mysterious inaction of the police over serious allegations of forgery and misappropriation raised by officiating President of the Servants of the People Society (SoPS) Sri K. C. Tripathy against a pack of miscreants acting in the name of the Society.

After ORISSA MATTERS exposed how the Will purported to be of Gopabandhu Das on the basis of which SoPS has occupied The Samaja, as claimed by the same paper, is a fraudulently prepared document for illegally occupying the Samaja, the people of Orissa are determined to save The Samaja from the illegal occupiers.

The SoPS, on the other hand, in course of its business, has located misappropriation of several hundreds of crores of rupees from The Samaja revenue by some of its members while serving on its behalf in management of the paper. Serious felonies having been unveiled by the committee of investigation headed by Justice (Rtd) Arijit Pasayat, it was clear to the swindlers that the law’s long hand would certainly reach them one day. Therefore, they have allegedly occupied the SoPS and The Samaja by creation of false election papers, on knowing about which, Sri Tripathy had attracted attention of the police in writing. But the police are sleeping over his allegations as the questioned occupiers of SoPS have engaged a pack of former IAS and IPS officers to work for them.

On being personally apprised of this mischief, the DGP has assured to look into the matter.

The Samaja in Death Bed: A Reader’s Suggestion Deserves Serious Attention

Subhas Chandra Pattanayak

As we are one with the people of Orissa in collective agony over the danger that ‘The Samaja’ is facing, an esteemed reader of ours, Dr. Asoka Misra, has advanced a suggestion on how to save the newspaper of the people’s beloved Utkalmani from the jaws of the Servants of the People Society (SoPS).

It is a very valuable suggestion.

Commenting on our write up that, for the first time, raised a question on genuineness of the Will of Pt. Gopabandhu Das basing on which the SoPS has occupied The Samaja, Dr. Misra has said,

“ In criminology there is an axiom: “There is no absolute or perfect Crime ” meaning thereby, any act of crime is bound to leave a trail of evidence which needs to be detected only. Great that, finally orissamatters.com has been able to spot this fraud after many decades.…………

Now after this exposure if there is an iota of self-respect left with the SoPS, then the original WILL with the signature/thumb impression of Pt. Gopabandhu Das and witnesses thereto be published by them in The Samaja as soon as possible as suggested.

The Police and/or the appropriate authorities of Judicial system ( since the questionable WILL must have been fraudulently probated too ) of the State must take into cognizance of THE 420 of the Society concerned suo moto and IMMEDIATELY handover The Samaja Management to a NEW NGO under the direct supervision of the Hon’ble HC of Orissa, till the matter is settled lawfully in keeping with the high esteem and pride of THE ORIYAS,and unquestionably the founder of The Samaja, UTKALMANI PUNDIT GOPABANDHU DAS .

We have every reason to believe that the copy of the Will, published by us, is the genuine copy of the Will.

The Samaja had published this document as the “photo” of the Will. We have just investigated into it and have found that it is not a legally tenable document as neither Gopabandhu nor the witnesses have signed it. This leads to suspicion that Will was not even “dictated” by Gopabandhu as claimed.

From FIRs in Police Stations and from Cases in Civil Courts and from the report of investigation by a committee headed by Justice Arijit Pasayat, it transpires that there are members in SoPS who are involved in rampant misuse and misappropriation of the revenue generated by The Samaja and a document in our possession even shows that Manubhai Patel, whose locos standi as President of SoPS has been challenged by its life member-cum-President-in-charge K.C.Tripathy in a civil court, had misused the paper’s revenue in his personal political electioneering in his home province.

The Samaja needs immediate extrication from the most difficult situation it has fallen into. If the SoPS has occupied the paper and its press and properties fraudulently on the basis of a fake Will, the State Government should take over its management without loss of time and initiate every possible legal action against each and everybody involved with the crime.

Till the final decision as to who shall manage The Samaja is arrived at, its management should be handed over to the trade union of its employees, who have been producing the paper and bringing in its revenue through their dedicated and relentless service.

In this context, Dr. Misra’s suggestion deserves deep cogitation.

PUNISHMENT WILL NOT END CONTEMPT, JUDICIAL INTROSPECTION MAY

Subhas Chandra Pattanayak

Every Indian who loves democracy is shocked over throwing of shoes by a lady litigant at Justice Arijit Pasayat of the Supreme Court of India when he was hearing a case involving the lady on Mach 20. She was instantly punished with imprisonment for contempt.

But the issue has been preferred for review by a different bench when the second member of the bench hearing the case, Justice Asok Kumar Ganguli could not approve of the punishment as to him instant punishment was not in consonance with natural justice. The lady should have been heard on why she threw the shoe.

This, to a common man, seems indicative of contradiction that the Apex Court is living with.

In the Court room of the highest judiciary of the country a woman throws her shoes at a Judge. What more severe could have been the display of contempt?

If it is not instantly punishable by the judge, judges may feel insecure in handling tricky questions and crafty persons may succeed in their design to intimidate the members of judiciary.

If at all the new bench looking into the matter feels that the punished lady should have been given opportunity to defend herself, should she then not be encouraged to defend the contempt she executed against the hearing judge?

I am afraid, if best of judicial foresight is not invoked, the result may lead to judicial anarchy.

However, the Supreme Court need inform the peoples of this country, in this peculiar situation, as to if Justice Ganguli, constituting the bench with Justice Pasayat, in differing with the contempt taken into cognizance by the later, has done so on his perception that the intimidating contempt publicly shown against his brother judge is not a contempt shown against the Court.

If contempt against an individual judge is not contempt against the Court, the lady should be heard as to why she was so full of wrath against the individual judge and on her explanation, law should be allowed to take its own course between two individuals: she at one end and Sri Pasayat at the other.

It may be pertinent to refer here to a contempt proceeding pending for years in the Orissa High Court. The proceeding is drawn against Sri Narayan Patra, father of a woman murdered by her in-laws. Patra had alleged in the Court that certain Judges thereof were in criminal nexus with the in-laws of his daughter in the murder case. He has named the Judges. In responding to the contempt proceedings, he has stated that he has no contempt against the Court; but he has raised the allegation against the judges that have corrupted the Court. Raising allegations against individual Judges that have played havoc with the credibility of the Court by being in nexus with criminals cannot be read as contempt against the Court, he has stated. After his statement the High Court has slept over its contempt proceeding and thus it is pending for around twelve years!

It is therefore proper for the Apex court to decide as to whether contempt / allegation / wrath expressed against individual judges under particular circumstances would be considered as contempt against Courts.

If the lady had no intention to intimidate Justice Pasayat on the bench but like Narayan Patra she has suffered any injury in course of justice for which she holds the judge personally responsible, punishment will not end the contempt; though judicial introspection may help build up the environment where no Judge would earn contempt.