To 
The Registrar
Supreme Court of India
Delhi 

Subject : Online Judicial System 

Esteemed Sir

Aggrieved with the inhuman way, I and other visitors are treated at 138 Tis Hazari District court, I offer my services for establishment of Online Judicial System. The salient features of proposed system are :-
1. No waiting period. The proposed system can be enforced any day beginning today.
2. On line registration of plaintiffs and defendants with login information to access their case.
3. Online registration of cases.
4. OFFLINE service of notice to defendant(s) with a link to plaintiff's submission.
5. Online reply from defendant(s).
6. Online review by judge.
7. Online rejoinder from plaintiff.
8. Online reply from defendants
9. Online intraction session involving judge, plaintiff and defendants.
10. Online judicial verdict.
As pilot project the system may begin with one court and then extended to some more. Please grant me an appointment for personal interaction. 

Regards 
Yours faithully 

Dr K Chaudhry 
Copy to   Delhi High Court   Union Law Ministry   Media

The Chief Justice 
Delhi High Court 

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. 
With regards 
Yours faithfully 
 

(Dr K Chaudhry) 
Copy to : CBI  VC DDA  CM  LG  PM  Media

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.