GRAVE MISCARRIAGE OF JUSTICE BY SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

On 02.12.2014 after appearing with great difficulty before Justice S.J. Mukhopadhaya at Supreme Court, we were constrained to return to Pondicherry. But on 04.12.2014 we sent our counter for the contempt petition filed against us by Registered Post Acknowledgment Due (RPAD) from Delhi itself, addressed to the Registrar of Supreme Court, since Justice Mukhopadhaya refused to accept our counter that day.

Now it is interesting to note that the Registrar sent us notice of appearance on 05.12.2014 which we received in the afternoon of 08.12.2014 informing us that we were supposed to appear on 09.12.2014 at 10.30 a.m. before Supreme Court. How on earth does the Registrar expect us to appear within 12 hours? Is it humanly possible, especially with our meager resources?

What is more interesting to note is that our letter dated 04.12.2014 enclosing our counter in contempt petition, posted from Delhi, did not reach the Registrar before 09.12.2014. Is the postal service for Supreme Court and for the common man different? Definitely not and therefore we can conclude that not only has the Registrar played foul but he along with Justice Gogoi and Justice Nariman have all helped perpetuate injustice.

But even more astounding fact is that this time round Justice Gogoi and Justice Nariman have illegally and unlawfully modified their own order through contempt proceedings to do the dirty work of illegal eviction for the Ashram trustees. Is that legal and permissible? The ‘suit premises’ has been now cited as specific premises viz. Ambabhikshu House wherein we are residing, without taking in account the fact that this is an interim petition not regarding any property dispute.

Moreover it can be seen that we are to be evicted but no provisions have been made either monetarily or otherwise. Is the police going to throw us on the streets and leave us to be raped and murdered by the trustees and their henchmen? Or are we supposed to commit suicide to cater to the whims and fancies of the corrupt judges of the Supreme Court and the Ashram Trustees.

Within a week all answers will be known. Let us wait and watch whether there is still a Power called God who hears and answers the prayers of the common suffering man. In any event Supreme Court has become a monument of injustice which is deteriorating exponentially everyday.

Supreme Court Final Order in Contempt Petition is produced.

ITEM NO.2                                          COURT NO.8                                                                      SECTION XII

S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

CONMT.PET.(C) No. 395/2014 In SLP(C) No. 27620/2012

AUROBINDO ASHRAM TRUST                                                            Petitioner(s)

VERSUS

JAYASHREE PRASAD & ORS.                                                              Respondent(s)

(With office report)

Date : 09/12/2014 This petition was called on for hearing today.

CORAM :                HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJAN GOGOI

                                HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN

For Petitioner(s)                       Mr. Sanjay Parikh,Adv.

                                                Ms. Mamta Saxena,Adv.

                                                Mr. A.N. Singh,Adv.

                                                Mr. Ritwik Parikh,adv.

                                                Ms. Anitha Shenoy,Adv.

For Respondent(s)

UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following

O R D E R

The contempt petition is disposed of in terms of the signed order.

 (MADHU BALA)                                                                            (ASHA SONI)

 COURT MASTER                                                                        COURT MASTER

(Signed order is placed on the file)

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION

CONTEMPT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 395 OF 2014

IN

SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 27620 OF 2012

AUROBINDO ASHRAM TRUST                                                        ...PETITIONER(S)

VERSUS

JAYASHREE PRASAD & ORS.               ..ALLEGED CONTEMNOR/RESPONDENT(S)

O R D E R

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the relevant material.

By Order dated 29th April, 2014 while dismissing the special leave petition filed by the respondents, this Court had granted time until 31^st July, 2014 to the respondents (Petitioners in the SLP) to vacate the premises in question subject to certain conditions including the filing of an undertaking, inter alia, to the effect that the respondents will vacate the premises on or before 31st July, 2014.

...2/

--2-

In terms of the aforesaid order, the five respondents had filed their respective undertakings to vacate the premises situated at Sri Aurobindo Ashram, “ Ambabhikshu House”, No. 33, Dr.Ambedkar Street, Kuruchikuppam, Pondicherry- 605012 on or before 31st July, 2014.

The premises having not been vacated as ordered and undertaken this contempt petition has been filed. As despite service of notice, the respondents had not appeared and had not filed any counter affidavit, bailable warrant of arrest was directed to be issued against each of the respondents and the matter was posted on 2^nd December, 2014. It is stated upon execution of the warrant of arrest directed by this Court, the Respondent Nos. 4 & 5 had appeared on 2nd December, 2014. For reasons that need not detain us the matter was deferred for hearing today i.e. 09.12.2014.

...3/

--3-

Not only the order of this Court dated 29^th April, 2014 is clear and unambiguous, in fact, the respondents have undertaken to vacate the premises in terms of the aforesaid order on or before 31^st July, 2014 and have filed their respective undertakings before this court on 7th May, 2014. Despite the above, as the respondents have not vacated the premises. Violation of this Court's order referred to above, therefore is clear. Accordingly, we direct the respondents to vacate the said premises within seven days from today failing which, we direct the jurisdictional Police Station viz. All Mahila Police Station, Pondicherry, to evict the respondents from the premises viz. Sri Aurobindo Ashram, “ Ambabhikshu House”, No. 33, Dr.Ambedkar Street, Kuruchikuppam, Pondicherry- 605012. Beyond the above, we do not consider it necessary to issue any further orders in the Contempt Petition.

...4/

--4-

The contempt petition is disposed of accordingly.

                                                                                                         …....................J.
                                                                                                    [RANJAN GOGOI]
NEW DELHI                                                                                    …....................J.

9TH DECEMBER, 2014                                                    [ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN]

OUR LETTER TO THE PRESIDENT OF INDIA

As a last recourse to get justice we have written a letter to the President of India. We hope that at least the Hon'ble President will intervene and help us. Let us wait and watch.

Madhumita Banerjee covers up trustees’ misdeeds

Madhumita Banerjee, a Punjabi woman married to a Bengali, runs an NGO called “Disha” in Pondicherry. She is a very close associate of the trustees and Matriprasad. As she is associated with various political groups in Pondicherry, trustees have always entertained her to get their work done. The trustees used her well in our case also with regard to the investigation conducted by National Women Commission.

I met her for the first time on 25.06.2006 when she visited Ambabhikshu House to canvass for her party during Pondicherry Municipal Election. 

It was a Sunday evening at about 6.45pm. She along with her friend knocked at my door asking to vote for them. Just for fun I began chitchatting with Madhumita and asked her what her party would do if it won. Her reply shocked me. She said that she has always helped ashramites and the trustees. She informed me that she was the go-between person between the trustees and the State women Commission (SCW) and the National Women Commission (NCW) in the complaint given by the five sisters.

Wow! This was a revelation to me so I goaded her further for information. I asked her what she knew about the five sisters’ case and how she had helped the trustees.

Her idea about our complaint to NCW was vague as she had only a cursory glance of the file which had been submitted by our lawyer at the Chief Secretariat, Pondicherry, to Mrs. Poornima Advani on 5/10/2004 in the morning. But promptly she had called the trustee Dr. Dilip Kumar Dutta and handed over a copy of this file to Matriprasad.

She also boasted to me that she had visited Delhi with the Chairperson of State Women Commission Mrs. Kamalini to convince the chairperson of National Women Commission Mrs. Poornima Advani that the Ashram was free from all vices. She also commented that these 5 sisters were psycho-cases.

After she had finished her story, I asked her whether I appeared to be a psycho-case. She replied “NO”. Then I showed her the original pornographic cartoons received by me. Only then she realized her faux pas and asked me who I was. When I told her that I was one of the five sisters whose name she did not even know and much less about our sexual harassment, she turned white. By then my third sister also joined me. 

Since Madhumita Bannerjee was caught red-handed, without apologizing to us she hurriedly left Ambabhikshu House with her political friend without visiting any other rooms. But on a parting note she said that men in the Ashram were bad and abusive.

After several months, Madhumita Banerjee, who had now become richer by trustees’ grace, threatened me openly with kidnap, assault and even rape. She categorically advised me to keep quiet about her dirty role. What a request!

I reported her insulting and obnoxious behavior as well as her threat to me to one of her political colleagues, who heard me out sympathetically. This colleague approached and briefed the senior politician, who in turn took Madhumita Bannerjee to task. Only then she toned down since she had been given the choice to either quit the party or continue with her behavior.

What a nightmare trustees had created for everyone!

Entry of National Human Rights Commission, New Delhi,

Knowing the trustees' vindictive track record and to safeguard our interests Arunashri, Nivedita and myself, went to Delhi.

In the first week of April 2005 we met Dr. Girija Vyas-ji, the then NCW Chairperson and Mrs. Nirmala Sitharaman-ji, the then South Zone Head of NCW. We asked whether any report of enquiry had been submitted by SWC to NCW, as alleged in ‘The Hindu’ on 19.01.2005. We also informed them that no such copy had been furnished to us, in spite of our request, by SWC and if we could be provided with a copy of this alleged enquiry report. Even though the office was searched, no report to this effect was found. So, we requested Dr. Girija Vyas-ji to reopen our case and help us. She assured us help but said no relief could be given immediately without going through the case records.

Desperate for immediate relief we approached the National Human Rights Commission, New Delhi, (NHRC). After hearing us patiently Dr. Justice Shivaraj Patil-ji, (retd.) then a member of the commission, expressed unhappiness at our plight and harassment, especially since the same was being caused at Sri Aurobindo Ashram, Pondicherry. He had been a former Justice at Madras High Court and had great regard for Ashram. He directed us to give a written complaint, which we did on the same day of our meeting.

Thereafter we returned to Pondicherry and were caught up in the fresh case O.S. No.409/2005 filed for preventing the trustees from illegally expelling us from Ashram based on the impugned report of A.V. Nagarajan. After hearing our case on 28.04.2004 Mr. N. Krishnasamy, (Hon’ble Judge of PDM, Pondicherry) granted us exparte injunction on merits. Thereafter on 10.06.2005 this injunction was made final after conducting a thorough enquiry on both sides. (See posting dated 07.02.2005)

In May 2005 Arunashri received intimation of an enquiry being conducted by IGP, Pondicherry, on behalf of NHRC. A big drama ensued since without conducting any enquiry IGP Mr. Meena, had already sent his report, based on the media clipping of 19.01.2005 and the alleged acquittal of the accused in S.T.R. No.7919/2004 (based on F.I.R. No.213/2004 filed for our sexual harassment). (See posting dated 19.09.2004, 14.10.2004, 09.05.2005 and 18.10.2014 about corrupt police).

Pretending to correct their illegal act, Mr. Meena, (then IGP) constituted an enquiry by appointing one N.T. Sivadasan, as the enquiry officer, who also conducted no proper enquiry. However his alleged report never reached us nor was ever forwarded to NHRC. The trustees fabricated this report in 2008 with the help of N.T.Sivadasan for filing the same in their C.R.P. No.3314/2007. The trustees also circulated this report as report of NHRC to thwart our claims of sexual harassment and project us in bad light. (See posting dated 15.07.2008).

NHRC has closed our case and issued orders dated 07.11.2005 and 24.03.2006, stating that since NCW was investigating the matter, no interference was needed. On receipt of N.T.Sivadasan’s report we filed application under RTI for a copy of it from NHRC. There is no mention of N.T.Sivadasan’s report in their communication.

Our RTI application and the answer from NHRC are produced below.

The First Phase of Litigation

The first phase of litigation between the trustees and we five sisters began on and from 23.03.2001. The circumstances and cause of action for all multifaceted arose from the point where Jayashree was brutally assaulted in the presence of one of the trustees of Ashram, one Veda Prakash Johar, who did nothing to stop the inhuman assault. Thereafter the trustees tried their best to suppress the incident of assault. But because of our persistent demand for justice, we were all targeted one by one.

On 21.03.2001 Hemlata was issued a chit saying that her name had been removed from ‘Prosperity List’ of the Ashram. Prosperity List is a list of all the inmates who are being taken care of in every way by the Ashram and are completely dependent on the Ashram for their survival. Based on this chit Hemlata filed a civil suit for permanent injunction on 23.03.2001 in the morning in O.S. No.215/2001 before the Hon’ble I Additional Munsif at Pondicherry. (See postings of 09.01.2001, 30.03.2001 and 13.09.2002)

As a way to shush me for repeatedly demanding and later threatening to go to the police to lodge a complaint for Jayashree’s assault, the trustees punished me by allowing me to take food only through carrier service. I complied for about three weeks then realizing that we were being needlessly targeted, I wrote to the concerned trustees that I was going to resume taking my food at the Ashram Dining Room. On 22/3/2001 I was allowed to take food from the Dining Room counter. But on 23.03.2001 when with my four elder sisters I went for breakfast none of us were given food. (See posting of 24.03.2001).

After I filed O.S. No.215/2001 I was charged with false allegation of misconduct. After issuing appropriate legal notice for defamation I filed a criminal case defamation in S.T.R. No.864/2001 on 03.04.2001 before the Judicial Magistrate I of Pondicherry where the then trustees and their three henchmen were accused of defaming me and spreading lies about me. (See postings of 15.05.2001, 06.11.2001 and 24.11.2004). The accused were acquitted because the judge had been compromised. I have preferred a criminal appeal in Cr.A. No.477/2005 challenging the unjust acquittal and it is pending disposal before the Hon’ble Madras High Court. But till date this case remains the only one where all the trustees appeared in person as accused and faced the Judge and because of this indigestible humiliation the trustees have never forgiven my family and me.

The trustees came to know about this criminal case even before the notice reached them. They were furious and targeted my four elder sisters also. My sisters were issued with an illegal show cause notice backdated to 02.04.2001. This show cause notice already contained the punishment even without going into the veracity of the allegations made against them. My sisters were falsely accused of ‘misbehavior and defiance’. On 09.04.2001 they filed O.S. No.253/2001 challenging the malafide show cause notice issued to them before the Hon’ble I Additional District Munsif at Pondicherry. For ten long years needlessly the battled raged on in this case. (See postings on 15.04.2001 and 09.04.2010)

Since the trustees misrepresented before the Hon’ble Madras High Court, my suit in O.S. No.215/2001 was summarily terminated and Mr. Menon was appointed as the third enquiry officer to conduct an enquiry into the allegations of misconduct leveled against me. He submitted to my lawyer at Madras/ Chennai a perverse undated report and before the trustees could take action based on Mr. Menon’s impugned report I challenged the same on 14.11.2002 by filing O.S. No.668/2002 before the Hon’ble I Additional District Munsif at Pondicherry. (See postings dated 14.11.2002, 03.12.2002, 01.03.2003 and 23.09.2008). The trial has been underway for the past four years and it could have been finished had the trustees not delayed and protracted the proceedings, which they are still doing. The trustees have had to pay fine two times of Rs.2,000/- for failing to conduct the trial of the case.

The easiest way to discredit and humiliate a lady is by casting aspersion on her character, conduct and behavior. This is how all the five sisters were subjected to gross humiliation. As we kept challenging the unjust actions of the trustees the first phase of the litigation unfolded.

Miscarriage of Justice by Corrupt Supreme Court Judges

With great difficulty and with an even heavier heart, in spite of losing all hope we were constrained to prefer S.L.P. No.27620/2012 before the Supreme Court of India. Luckily Justice H.L. Gokhale and Justice Nijjar were hearing our case and they granted us stay.

Thereafter our case was temporarily listed in April 2014 and without getting listed in the final list it was adjourned to 15.07.2014. However on 26.04.2014 suddenly our case was preponed by about 1 ½ months and got listed on 29.04.2014 before a new bench comprising of Justice S.J. Mukhopadhaya and Justice Ranjan Gogoi. Both these judges were totally biased and without giving us any opportunity to present our case they passed perverse and malafide order in interim petition, especially when the trial was underway in the suit for the past four years. These two judges literally threatened our lawyers when they tried to present our case and under two minutes malafide order of eviction was granted on 29.04.2014 by these judges.

Order dated 29.04.2014 is produced hereunder.

Manoj Das Gupta needs Women Props to Talk to Five Sisters

The trustees had illegally prevented us from having food at the Ashram Dining Room intimidating us with the presence of police. The Warden of Jenny Women’s Hostel had refused to accommodate us and had also informed Manoj Das Gupta about their reluctance to continue with whatever underhand undertaking that had taken place between them. However the trustees not only continued to deny and deprive we five sisters from partaking food from Dining Room, they failed to make any alternative provisions for our sustenance. Therefore we filed I.A.No.2094/2010 for restoring our food and all other facilities. Orders were passed allowing us to eat at Ashram Dining Room on 27.10.2010.

In the evening of 27.10.2010 we five sisters made urgent attempts to meet Manoj Das Gupta. We finally landed up at Manushri Chatterjee’s house, his girl-friend with whom he daily has his dinner. We rang the bell and none other than Manjushri opened the door. After several requests, during which her brother Swadesh came out and tried to shoo us away but we did not leave, Manoj Das Gupta finally came forward to talk us. We informed him that our food and all other amenities and facilities and as provided to every inmate had been restored to us on 27.10.2010 by the order passed in I.A. No.2094/2010 by the Hon’ble Judge of the Principal District Munsif at Pondicherry. At first he simply refused to believe us. Then when we read out the directive portion of order of restoration, he hid behind his façade of seemly obedience and questioned the veracity of the order.

Only when we categorically informed him that we were going to eat our dinner at Ashram Dining Room that he toned down and sarcastically replied, ‘one more day of not eating in Dining Room will not really kill you.’ What a thoroughly reprehensible statement! We answered him that only we knew with what great difficulty we had survived this ordeal without having food but he simply laughed mockingly. He then told us that we could only eat at Dining Room after he had consulted with the other trustees, his co-conspirators, and asked us to meet him the next day at Trust Office, inaptly named ‘Grace Office’ by the trustees since this office has brought total disgrace to the whole of Ashram community.

As instructed we went to Dis-“Grace Office” today at about 11.30 p.m. Once again Manoj Das Gupta met us surrounded and supported by women-inmates. Shilpi Shroff, Jahnavi Ravikanti, Abhipsa Nagda were some of the women we spotted standing behind him when Manoj Das Gupta informed us that we could go and have our lunch at Ashram Dining Room. We wanted in writing his statement but he assured us that there would be no problem and that no one would stop us.

However when we went to the Ashram Dining Room people took our photos, which is not permitted, and passed nasty comments. Thank God, at least nobody denied us food.

Advocate Commissioner’s Report Exposes Trustees

On 19.12.2008 Justice K. Venkataraman suo motto appointed an Advocate Commissioner and directed the trustees and we five sisters to choose three places of alternate accommodation each. He directed the Advocate Commissioner to visit all these premises and file his report regarding safety, security and suitability of the accommodations.

Advocate Commissioner, as directed, visited Pondicherry. Our lawyer was present along with us. But from trustees’ side a lawyer, not even on record with regard to our case, was present. Matriprasad and Purushottam Kothari tried to represent the trustees but the Advocate Commissioner refused to allow them to be present since they did not have any authorization letter of representation.

Once again the trustees had acted in their highhanded manner and named five choices of alternate accommodation. We had come prepared only with three. Advocate Commissioner showed leniency towards them and thus the enquiry began.

At every guest house/boarding house Advocate Commissioner was accompanied by the two advocates and we five sisters. Each Warden/Manager let us inspect the premises except Jenny Working Women’s Hostel. The warden categorically stated that there was no vacancy and allowed none of us to inspect the premises. Another Manager, on seeing us, told the Advocate Commissioner that it would not be prudent on his part to accommodate us since we were not used to this lifestyle of working women’s hostel. A third Warden expressed her unwillingness but said that the girls were good but not the trustees, who misrepresented and mislead other people and who were harassing the girls.

The fifth accommodation which the trustees had chosen was an unfinished structure and no one in-charge was present to show us around. The Advocate Commissioner did not mention this place in his investigation report because there was nothing to report. Later we came to know that it was a wing of Jenny Working Women’s hostel.

The accommodations cited by the trustees were for working women who were out of hostel during the whole day and only needed a roof overhead to spend the night. Most of the women accommodated there left for the weekend to visit their nearby situated homes. But none of the five sisters were working women and the thought of shifting to these alternate accommodations seemed like our worst nightmare.

Since the trustees had only cited pigeon holes as alternate accommodations for us, we requested the Advocate Commissioner to visit the Ashram accommodation provided to us so that he could better appreciate and compare the unbelievable differences between what was chosen and what had been provided. But because the trustees vehemently opposed our proposal through their present lawyer, Advocate Commissioner could not grant our wish. (Also see posting dated 20.12.2008).

Typed-Copy of the Report is produced below

Warden of 'Peace Society' States that Trustees are Harassing the Sisters

A most interesting event happened when the Advocate Commissioner visited ‘Peace Society’, a women’s hostel cited by the trustees for inspection. The Warden of ‘Peace Society’ took the Commissioner aside and reported to him that even previously the girls had been ordered to stay here. She told him that one Purushottam Kothari and his wife Maya had visited her with an elderly person called Batti. These people claimed to be our brother, sister-in-law and father. They represented that their sisters were coming from northern India in a few days and would be here for a few months. Since women hostel was a safe place and they had heard highly about this particular one, they desired that their sisters should be accommodated under her care. They had even paid some advance.

The Warden continued her story and said later she came to know from her friend working at ‘Department for Women and Child Development’, Pondicherry, (DWCD) that these sisters were inmates of Ashram who were facing sexual harassment at the hands of the trustees and that Govt. of Pondicherry was investigating the matter. Her friend also told her that these people had come from the trustees side to misrepresent, mislead and her soft-soap her since they wanted to put up a good image before the pending investigation.

The Warden told the Commissioner that the trustees were harassing the sisters and that we were good girls. But in view of the pending litigation it would not be fair to the other already resident-women if she gave us accommodation in her hostel.

Advocate Commissioner mentioned this comment in his report dated 22.12.2008. 

Fabricated N.T. Sivadasan’s Report Paraded as NHRC’s Report

The Pondicherry police were caught red-handed in their collusion with trustees so IGP Meena and Mrs. Chhaya Sharma initiated enquiry proceedings by appointing Mr. N.T. Sivadasan as an enquiry officer. The details pertaining to N.T.Sivadasan’s enquiry is as follows:

1. On 17.05.2005 women police were sent to our aged parents’ house informing them that their daughters should appear at the All Women Police Station immediately. We didn’t go.
2. On 18.05.2005 Jayashree and Arunashri went to meet Mrs. Chhaya Sharma to enquire why such an enquiry is taking place, especially after she had informed them that report was already sent and had categorically desisted to help. On her table they saw the impugned report dated 10.01.2005 of Mr. Nagarajan which she tried to hide.
3. On 18.05.2005 N.T. Sivadasan sent women police with SP Thamizharasi to Ambabhikshu House after 10.30 at night to serve notice of enquiry on us through intimidation. At 10.30 pm the door of the resident-complex closes and the watchman had to be roused for the police women to be able to meet us and forced us to receive enquiry summons.
4. On 19.05.2005 five sisters went to the All Women Police Station, protested against the unjust service of notice and the constitution of an incorrect enquiry. N.T. Sivadasan simply refused to listen to us and threatened us to comply. We contacted NHRC and they asked us to participate so that the police may not harass us further.
5. On 20.05.2005 backdated summons were issued by N.T. Sivadasan. SP Thamizharasi came again to serve this notice. We refused to accept since the date was wrongly mentioned. She rectified the date and we took notice.
6. On 24.05.2005 all five sisters went to the All Women Police Station. N.T. Sivadasan was present along with SP Thamizharasi. We submitted our written complaints and present the long history of harassment faced by us. They heard us and told us that we shall be called again for further enquiry, especially when they will examine the accused men mentioned by us. As a precaution we also sent our statements to NHRC through RPAD to keep NHRC updated about us.
7. On 29.05.2005 N.T. Sivadasan visited Abmabhikshu House for spot enquiry in our absence. He was seen with one Dilip Sharma, an Ambabhikshu resident. Dilip Sharma was taken as an inmate under dubious circumstances when Achyut Patel (Managing Trustee’s, late Harikant Patel, nephew) was caught for misappropriation of funds. Dilip Sharma is a known supporter of the trustees who approaches the Pondicherry police on their behalf for all their mischief.

This was the last that N.T.Sivadasan was ever heard or seen. We did not know the final outcome of this enquiry, until suddenly on 11.07.2008, N.T.Sivadasan’s report was filed by trustees in their M.P. No.1/2008 in CRP No.3314/2007. The manner of obtaining and filing this report is extremely interesting since it clearly exposes the collusion between trustees, the men causing us sexual harassment and Pondicherry police.

1. On 14.01.2008 (after more than three years) Chandramani Patel, who attempted to molest Arunashri, filed an application through RTI before Pondicherry Police to obtain a copy of N.T. Sivadasan’s report. Procedurally RTI application should have been made to NHRC because report is claimed to have been submitted to NHRC.
2. Pondicherry police furnishes a report to Chandramani with the most glaring errors which challenge the veracity of the report. Covering letter of SSP, Pondicherry, mentioned the date of submission of report by N.T.Sivasadan as 15.06.2005 whereas the report is dated 16.05.2005, one day before. This is not a typographical error because both the dates appear repeatedly in other places. How can a report made tomorrow be furnished today? Well all is possible in the kingdom of corruption and collusion.
3. Chandramani handed over this report to the trustees who filed it in M.P. No.1/2008 in CRP No.3314/2007 and who have been parading this report  of N.T. Sivadasan ever since as NHRC’s report. 

Pertinent questions that arise are:

1. Why no mention has been made of N.T. Sivadasan’s report in NHRC’s orders dated 07.11.2005 and 24.03.2006 if such a report had indeed been submitted before the NHRC?
2. Why did Chandramani give report to the trustees?
3. When exactly did the Pondicherry police fabricate this report for the use and misrepresentation of the trustees?

The nexus between the men who caused us sexual harassment, the Pondicherry police and the Ahram trustees is clearly exposed by this report of N.T. Sivadasan.

Produced below are the two orders of NHRC dated 07.11.2005 and 24.03.2006.

Golconde Guest House as Alternate Accommodation

Meanwhile the trustees preferred an appeal in C.M.A. No. 35/2005 against the interim order dated 10.06.2005 at Appellate Authority Pondicherry. Trustees’ Appeal was dismissed on 30.01.2007 and the Trial Court Order dated 10.06.2005 was upheld since the balance of convenience was in our favor.

The trustees then preferred a revision at the Madras High Court in C.R.P. No.3314/2007 challenging the dismissal of their appeal on 30.01.2007. Justice K. Venkataraman was the presiding judge who openly sided with the trustees. In fact he repeatedly told our lawyer that the girls should be taught a lesson of how life is lived outside the Ashram!

Trial Court order dated 10.06.2005 and Appellate Court order dated 30.01.2007 did not suffer from any legal infirmity and were based on principles of natural justice as well as balance of convenience.In spite of no question of law being raised by the trustees, much less a legal infirmity, Justice K. Venkataraman, under the guise of showing concern for us by stating that when trial commences the girls will be further harassed and in order to safeguard the girls’ interests it would be better if they changed residence, passed order on 29.01.2008 directing us to reside in some other accommodation other than in Ambabhikshu House.

This was not the relief sought for by the trustees in their C.R.P. No.3314/2007 and definitely not by us. But since we were helpless we complied with Justice K. Venkataraman’s malafide order dated 29.01.2008. 

‘Golconde Guest House’ is a guest house maintained by the Ashram for visitors and some inmates.We requested to be accommodated at ‘Golconde Guest House’ till the trial was over. As far as food was concerned the question did not arise and Ashram Dining Room could continue as before. We also asked for a reasonable sum of Rs.100/- per day to be paid to each one of us to meet the expenses of our daily needs and necessities since our ‘Prosperity’ had been stopped.

Birth of A.V. Nagarajan’s Impugned Report

For the sexual harassment faced by us we had already approached the Pondicherry Police and the National Commission for Women, New Delhi. Both these statutory institutions were already investigating the matter. But when on 19.09.2004 the police came to arrest Girish Panda in the afternoon, the trustees woke up to the fact that they had better cover their backs.

In the evening at about 5.00 p.m. when I went to Ambabhikshu House the Managing Trustee had pasted a back dated notice of enquiry dated 11.09.2004 informing all and sundry about the enquiry proposed to be conducted by the trustees through Mr. A.V. Nagarajan, which consisted of three phases which in fact amounted to

1. Sexual harassment as alleged by us against the named inmates
2. Some complaints against us by other named inmates
3. Anyone who had a complaint

On 19.09.2004 we wrote a letter to Manoj Das Gupta, Managing Trustee of Ashram, to stop this enquiry since Pondicherry police and NCW were already investigating the case. But he did not desist. The notice was placed on a makeshift notice board at the entrance of Ambabhikshu and in a way whereby passersby on the road could see it clearly.

Thereafter on 28.10.2004 we received summons from A.V. Nagarajan for the first phase of the enquiry - Sexual harassment as alleged by us against a few named inmates. We immediately informed him that he should not conduct an enquiry because NCW and police were looking into the matter. He also paid no heed to us and proceeded as planned. We did not participate because more competent authorized were apprised of our case.

We saw that a chained mental box appeared on a pillar beside the makeshift notice board and a notice was put up relating to the third phase of the enquiry - anyone who had a complaint. Thereafter for over a month A.V. Nagarajan collected complaints. This was an exercise to fabricate complaints against us. Inmates, residents of Ambabhiskhu House as well as non-residents, were pressurized by the trustees, Matriprasad and other henchmen, to give false complaints against us.

Subsequently A.V. Nagarajan issued us notice for the second and third phases of enquiry - some complaints against us by other named inmates & anyone who had a complaint. His notice did not contain the charges that we were supposed to refute and because we could not participate in an enquiry blindfolded, we abstained.

Today we have received a show cause notice dated 24.01.2005 from the trustees enclosing a copy of A.V. Nagarajan’s report dated 10.01.2005. This show-cause notice contains no charges framed against us. Brief perusal of the report also indicates no specific charges leveled against us. In fact the report contains and only gives synopsis of statements, hearsay and assumptions. Pending court proceedings, Nirmal Swain had appeared and participated in the enquiry. He also produced sub-judice documents which are totally irrelevant to the enquiry being conducted. As a lawyer he knows fully well his illegal act. His license to practice should be revoked.

We also found that an incomplete report had been furnished to us since we are not given the statements and documents which form part of the report. Trustees are again resorting to mischief and acting in their usual highhanded manner and suppress our complaints of sexual harassment completely in order to protect their henchmen.

Illegal Service of Notice

I filed O.S. No.668/2002 on 14.11.2002 challenging Mr. N.P.K. Menon’s impugned undated report. And today I can say that my apprehensions have proved right.

Together with O.S. No.668/2002 I filed an interim petition in I.A. No.2937/2002 for interim injunction to restrain the trustees from taking any action based on the perverse report of Mr. Menon. Injunction has been granted and status quo has been directed as an inmate of the Ashram.

But the trustees have to act in their highhanded manner to maintain their un-slackened track record of harassment. So Matriprasad and Nirmal Swain got hold of two probationers and pasted a backdated show cause notice on my door at Ambabhiskhu House, knowing fully well that O.S. No.668/2002 has been filed and exparte interim injunction of status quo has been granted through I.A. No.2937/2002. 

This was done simply to intimidate and harass me and humiliate my family.

Victimization Due to Criminal Case

Notices were issued to the accused trustees and the three accused inmates in the defamation case filed by Hemlata in S.T.R. No.864/2001 at Pondicherry. The trustees were simply furious becoming vindictive and revengeful. My sisters and even my parents were not spared. Some highlights of harassment. 

1. Arunashri taught painting classes for adults. Her classes were stopped by Ashok Acharya acting on the instructions of Shobha Mitra.
2. Arunashri’s library facility at Ashram School was stopped through Asmita Shah (maiden name) by Manoj Das Gupta, the Registrar of Ashram School and the Managing Trustee of Ashram.
3. Parents’ work which they offered voluntarily at the Ashram was stopped.
4. Parents’ food which they partook on payment basis from Ashram Dining Room was stopped.
5. Parents were repeatedly threatened by henchmen of the trustees to withdraw the criminal case if they wanted to live in peace at Pondicherry.

Civil Suit in O.S. No.215/2001

On 21.03.2001 Gangaram issued to me a chit as the Deputy Director of Physical Education Department of Ashram (P.E.D.) stopping all my sports activities at P.E.D. premises. The chit simply stated that my name had been removed from ‘Prosperity List’ of the Ashram. ‘Prosperity List’ is a list of all the inmates who are being taken care of in every way by the Ashram and are completely dependent on the Ashram for their survival, therefore this chit was in effect an illegal order of expulsion. So, on 23.03.2001, based on this chit I filed a civil suit for permanent injunction on 23.03.2001 in the morning in O.S. No.215/2001 before the Hon’ble I Additional Munsif at Pondicherry.

Later in the day around 4 pm I received a defamatory letter through registered post (RPAD) dated 22.03.2001 from the trustees making wildly false allegations against my character. This letter falsely accused me of being 6-7 months pregnant through one Krishna Belliappa and which I illegally terminated.

Even though this letter read ‘Strictly Personal and Confidential’ it had been widely circulated by the trustees through their henchmen.

1. On 23.03.2001 morning, even before I received this letter, Manjunath was flaunting it on my face when we were denied breakfast.
2. On 23.03.2001, in the morning when I went to give my complaint to the police Mr. Anand Mohan asked me about veracity of this letter. In fact he mistook Jayashree to be me.
3. Later on 24.03.2001 when Manjunath was called to the police station there also he showed to the police this letter.
4. This defamatory letter was so widely circulated that even other ashramites and locals came up to me to ask me about this letter.

This mischief was played out by the trustees in order to discredit us thereby suppressing the incident of Jayashree’s assault.

On 28.03.2001 trustees entered appearance through one C.S. Narasimham, whose son had been a student of Ashram School. C.S. Narasimham represented the contents of the letter dated 22.03.2001 and the Hon’ble Judge Mr. Nallathamby was so shocked that he shouted from his seat at C.S. Narasimhan. He firmly told Mr. Narasimhan to produce evidence before making allegations of such serious nature. Mr. Narasimhan took time to file trustees counter and left shamefaced from the court.

On 30.03.2001 trustees gave an undertaking that Hemlata’s food and shelter will not be disturbed but they failed to file their counter and even to produce any evidence to support their false allegations.