
|
Dr K.Chaudhry
M.B.B.S.
Astrologer
|
Tel: 42316457, 98105-71993
Website: ussupermall.net paschimvihar.net
saksham.net
USA Supermall
B-1/104
Paschim Vihar, New Delhi-110063
|
|
Organizations
USA Supermall
USA Supermall
Free Softwares
Janam Patri
(PCQuest CD-many issues)
Horo-match
Clinical Lab Reporter
Colorimetry
Prescribe
Ex-Editor
The Clinical Reporter
Indian Pharmaceutical Index
Author
Medicine for Students & Practitioners
Biochemical Techniques
Synopsis of Pathology
Medicine Mnemonics
Surgery Mnemonics
Pharmacology Mnemonics
Obst-Gynaecology Mnemonics
Anatomy Mnemonics
MCQ in Paraclinical Sciences
Free Horoscope Software at websites
|
January 5, 2005
The Chief Justice
Subect : Mockery of Judicial Process at 20 Community Centre, Vishal Enclave Esteemed Sir I am to submit the undermentioned points to prove that court proceedings at the court of Principal Magistrate, MCD at 20 Community Centre, Vishal Enclave constitute just a mockery of judicial process :- 1. that the accused receives summons, attends the court and returns without knowing name of the learned magistrate. Any accused enquiring about name is frowned upon by the staff. 2. that the court has absolutely no sitting arrangement inside court room outside the courtroom, or even at lawns. The visitors have to either keep standing or squatting on the floor. 3. that a peon looking person comes out of the court and asks the accused to "sign attendance". Only before the learned magistrate, he learns he had already signed up to plead guilty. 4. that the statement "The accused is still before you and has never pleaded guilty. I would opt to contest the charges." is meaningless for the learned magistrate. The accused has already been accepted as guilty and can argue only on quantum of fine. 5. On 16th November 2004, I complained to the Police Commissioner that a person purporting to be AK Gupta, JE, DDA Enforcement Branch, visited me without identity card. The complaint has remained unacknowledged. In view of the above, the judicial staff at the aforesaid court should be construed as in connivance with DDA/MCD staff and police in perpetration of an atmosphere of extortion. You are requested to look into the matter.
(Dr K Chaudhry)
Addendum : Summon dated 24.12.2004 delivered on 03.01.2005, the evening before NONhearing. Why do these people deny the accused a right to reschedule the day sufficiently in advance. |
I don't wish to comment on merits of the judgement. Technically, OP Sharma SI was considerate to me in not going in for nabbing me on wrong foot (misuse of sedation). I can't overlook concluding part of the sentence : Dr K Chaudhry and Dr Mrs Vinod Chaudhry have pleaded for liniency. I gladly accept their contention. The fine on both is reduced to Rs500/- each.
I never requested liniency - in fact original fine amounts
were never conveyed to me. The amount on my wife was perhaps Rs10,000/-
(bail amount for my nonappearance) - the other amount was decided only
after hypothetical mercy request.