Will Mr. Justice S.J. Mukhopadhaya Regret His Support?

Persons with the description pointing to Matriprasad, Nirmal Swain and Devdip Ganguly, were seen coming out of Justice S.J. Mukhopadhaya’s chamber on 13.10.2014 before the court-sitting.  If it is true why did such a meeting take place?

On 16.10.2014 Nirmal was spotted in the Supreme Court premises. Are there more pending cases relating to the Ashram other than (1) writ filed by Dr. Gayatri Sathapathy, (2) writ filed by Ramanathan and others, and (3) contempt filed against the five inmate-sisters?

Why is Nirmal Swain, accompanied by the two others, definitely Matriprasad, still hanging in and around Supreme Court? What mischief are they up to now? Are they trying to revoke the ban imposed by the Government on the denigrating book “The Lives of Sri Aurobindo” to continue their open support of Peter Heehs and rename ‘Sri Aurobindo Ashram’ as ‘Sri Sri Sri Peter Heehs Aphrodisiac Resort’? Or are there more little known cases against the trustees of Ashram challenging their ever-increasing mismanagement?

As it is, contrary to the claim of the Ashram trustees, a huge number of cases are currently pending before various High Court across the country and before the Supreme Court. And apparently the trustees prefer if the number of cases is on the rise because only then can they truly enjoy their favorite pastime – ‘inmate baiting’. Unfortunately the Ashram trustees forget that they represent and head a spiritual institution and behave worse than normal power-hungry men. Since these trustees take refuge behind the sacred names of Sri Aurobindo and the Mother ultimately we poor inmates face the brunt of it.

It is high time that at least proper rules and regulation for the administration of the Ashram be prepared and proper bye-laws incorporated in the Trust Deed and in the meantime the present unethical trustees be suspended as hastily as possible to curb and stop useless expenditures in frivolous cases.

Thank You Dr. Girija Vyas-ji

We wish to gratefully thank the following stalwarts for helping us and giving us some relief at least. How these people in authority helped us in spite of adverse pressure is truly noteworthy. 

1. Dr. Girija Vyas, (ex-Chairperson of NCW, New Delhi and presently MP)
2. Mrs. Nirmala Sitharaman (present Cabinet Minister)
3. Mrs. Devi Matthews (ex-Director of DWCD, Pondicherry)
4. Mrs. Meena (ex- Deputy Director of DWCD, Pondicherry)
5. Mr. T.M. Balakrishnan, I.A.S. (ex-Secretary (Welfare), Pondicherry)
6. Mr. Vasanthakumar, I.A.S. (ex Sub-Divisional Magistrate cum Deputy Collector at Pondicherry)
7. Mr. Vijaykumar Bidhuri, I.A.S. (ex Sub-Divisional Magistrate cum Deputy Collector at Pondicherry)
8. Mr. Ashokan (Assisting Mr. Vasanthakumar and Mr. V. Bidhuri)

Since May 2004 all the five sisters, one after another, began facing degrading, humiliating and traumatic sexual harassment at the hands of trustees' henchmen. Our sexual harassment was masterminded by Nirmal Swain, an inmate-lawyer who got his law degree through dubious means having completed a 3 years course of law in 6 years. He was the gang-leader of the group comprising mainly of his father Bhagawan Das Swain, Krishna Chandra (who assaulted Jayashree), Girish Panda, Santosh Nayak, Shakar @ Sajjal Mitra, Chandramani Patel (who tried to molest Arunashri), Jagabandhu Rout (who I am now told was instrumental in drawing the pornographic cartoons sent to us) and the girl-friends of all these men.

Arunashri and Jayashree gave complaints to Mr. Bhaktavachalam and Mr. Udaybhaskar, (President and Secretary of Bar Association at Pondicherry and both of whom were then representing the Ashram Trustees in Hemlata's criminal case). Our complaints and requests to stop the sexual harassment, though these lawyers, fell on the deaf and sadistic trustees.

We sisters were constrained to meet personally the trustees during their Trust Board meeting on 26.07.2004 and voice our complaint. The trustees openly sided with these men and literally called us names. Their stance exposed their collusion to the sexual harassment faced by us. (See posting dated 26.07.2004)

However on 03.08.2004 when Chandramani Patel tried to molest Arunashri, we got really scared and started giving out written complaints to various authorities who could help us.

1. On 04.08.2004 complaint to Manoj Das Gupta, Managing Trustee of Ashram
2. On 05.08.2004 complaint to Pondicherry Police
3. On 06.08.2004 complaint to National Commission for Women

The then NCW Chairperson Mrs. Poornima Advani, hands over our case to the then newly appointed Chairperson Mrs. S. Kamalini of SWC. We were relieved that at last we are going to get justice only to be thoroughly disillusioned. Without conducting any enquiry, on 19.01.2005, Mrs. Advani and Mrs. Kamalini gave statements to the effect that a report had been given by SCW to NCW finding our complaints of sexual harassment to be false. But they also gave a most revealing direction through the newspapers that men and women in the Ashram should be segregated. (See postings dated 06.10.2004 and 20.01.2005).

In spite of our written request no copy of the alleged report was furnished to us by Mrs. Kamalini (SWC). By then through the devious manipulations of the trustees, an impugned report had been created by them through the most appropriately initiated and conducted enquiry proceedings. Based on this impugned report trustees were trying to expel the five sisters. We were constrained to approach NCW and NHRC (National Human Rights Commission, New Delhi) in the first week of April 2005.

Luckily for us Dr. Girija Vyas had replaced Mrs. Poornima Advani. We met Dr. Girija Vyas (M.P.) and Mrs. Nirmala Sitharaman (present cabinet minister) both of whom were genuinely concerned for our welfare. In spite of their thorough search they were unable to unearth the report as reported on 19.01.2005 by Mrs. Poornima Advani and Mrs. Kamalini. So Dr. Girija Vyas reopened our case through the Department of Women and Child Development, Pondicherry (DWCD). This enquiry is still pending with the Pondicherry Government. (See postings dated 19.03.2007, 06.08.2008)

Because of Dr. Girija Vyas, at the first instance, later with the help and concern of all the above-named persons, we have managed to sustain our dignity to a very great extent. All of us thank these upright persons once again for all the help that they have extended towards our welfare.

CNN-IBN - THE RESURRECTED STING OPERATION

The untold inside story of the Sri Aurobindo Ashram, Pondicherry. This was a sting operation organised by the team CNN-IBN in 2007-2008. This video was supposed to be aired on 15.03.2008 at 9.00 p.m. prime-time. Till 5.00 p.m. on the 15 March 2008, the promos of this video titled 'The Divine Trap' were aired. Thereafter mysteriously the promos as well as the whole coverage vanished without being aired.

Trustees put a lot of pressure to have it stopped. It is rumored that money in crores was involved. The entire production team resigned in protest. I managed to get hold of a copy of this coverage which I am sharing now with all interested.

THEFT in Sri Aurobindo Ashram?

It is rumored that there has been a huge theft from Sri Aurobindo Ashram to the tune of 8 Crores. Why have the trustees not given a complaint to the police? Or is it that this huge sum has been spent by the trustees while extending hospitality and for the entertainment of three high profile judges who visited the Ashram Trustees 

1. Chief Justice of India, Mr. Justice R.M. Lodha, visited on 16.08.2014
2. Supreme Court Judge, Mr. Justice S.J. Mukhopadhaya, visited on 13.09.2014
3. Chief Justice of Madras High Court, Mr. Justice S.K. Kaul, visited on 03.10.2014

Probably that is why Mr. Justice S.J. Mukhopadhaya is supporting them so blatantly at the cost of his own personal reputation.

Most Glaring Bloopers of Menon’s Enquiry

Immediately after Mr. Menon packed up from Pondicherry after completing the enquiry, Matriprasad pitched his tent at Madras. The impugned undated report submitted by Mr. Menon reeks of Matriprasad’s way of thinking and style of logic. It is rumored that Mr. Menon was paid Rs.75 Lakhs apart from other huge perks. I think we can safely take this figure with a pinch of salt in the northern direction. 

1. No explicit charges were framed against me and I was given no chance to refute the same.
2. No evidence of my misconduct was produced, it was all hearsay.
3. Trustees’ witnesses were given 3 ½ days for being examined and cross-examined. I was given mere three hours.
4. Witnesses produced before Mr. Menon were different from the witnesses produced before Mr. Natarajan.
5. The common witnesses’ statement was different in each enquiry.
6. Krishna Belliappa, newly inducted inmate, with whom I was supposed to have carried on with and become pregnant, denied outright his role. (implying I had immaculate conception with Manoj Das Gupta as the father since Manoj Das Gupta is self-proclaimed incarnation of the Divine??!!!!)
7. Krishna Belliappa, in spite of being accused of the same misconduct, was examined by the trustees’ as their witness. (implying clear collusion.)
8. Statements of trustees’ witnesses were contradictory.
9. Alleged medical and other relevant records pertaining to my alleged pregnancy were available at Tresor Nursing Home, claimed Chitra Sen. But she deliberately failed to produce them since there were no records to produce.
10. Statements of my witnesses and myself were not correctly recorded even though we protested. Mr. Menon deliberately omitted to record our statements which were detrimental to the trustees’ interest. He almost threatened us to that effect saying that if we did not stop protesting he would not record any of our statements.
11. Dr. Prabhavathy, who alleged to have examined me when I was 6-7 months pregnant, gave a contradictory statement to the statement of the nurse who is supposed to have also examined me with her.
12. Dr. Prabhavathy is Prabhakar Runpanagunta’s @ Batti’s sister. She gave statement on behalf of the trustees on condition that Batti be made a trustee of Ashram.
13. The medical records produced by the trustees comprised on a medicine disbursement list of Ashram Dispensary. Through this list the trustees tried to prove my alleged pregnancy by the medicines I had received. Now interestingly this list contained names of men (old and young), women (old and young) and children all of who had also received each and every one of the medicine that I had been given. I was declared to be pregnant through this register, but all the other child-bearing-aged women inmates and probable male inmates, were left scott free. This indeed is a miraculous diagnosis of medical feat being achieved by a truly spiritualized Dr. Dilip Datta!
14. Lastly I was found to be 6 to 7 months pregnant by trustees’ witnesses as on 10.01.2001. Now Mr. Menon comes to the conclusion, based on the non-evidence produced before him, that I became pregnant towards the end of the year 2000 (implying November/December 2000). But by 10.01.2001, the date on which Dr. Prabhavathy had alleged to have examined me at Tresor Nursing Home, I was 6 to 7 months pregnant.

 A very interesting fact to note at this point is the date on which Dr. Prabhavathy claims to have examined me – 10.01.2001. On 09.01.2001, just a day before my eldest sister Jayashree is brutally assaulted. After Dr. Prabhavathy’s statement her brother Prabhakar Rupanagunta @ Batti becomes Ashram trustee. Do you really feel the dates are a coincidence???!!!

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.

Justice - Blind or Blindfolded?

At last yesterday the Order passed by Justice S.J. Mukhopadhaya has been put up on the Supreme Court website. The Order goes thus

“In spite of service of notice respondents have not filed affidavit nor appeared in the Court. In the circumstances, we issue bailable warrant against alleged contemnor…”

The beginning of the Order indicates

“(With office report)”

Now if you remember the Office Order mentioned that they have received our letter wherein we have expressed our inability to appear since we have no means and that our plight ought to be considered. (For details see posting of 14.10.2014)

Now isn’t it surprising that even when this letter has been put up before Justice S.J. Mukhopadhaya and Justice S.A. Bobde (a fresh Judge), they fail to pay attention to it and mention that we have failed to appear and hence to issue bailable warrant. I can understand Justice Mukhopadhaya’s stance but what happened to Justice Bobde? Or is Justice Bobde too scared to stand up for the truth and correct the wrongdoing of his senior? 

I am speechlessly stupefied at the blatant injustice and miscarriage of justice happening at the Supreme Court. Has justice become blind or blindfolded to cater to selfish interests?

Also pertinent to point out is when we have no resources to pay for appearing before the Supreme Court, how are we supposed to pay for the bailable warrant? Can someone, any person in authority please tell me how we are supposed to achieve this feat? And what happens when we fail to pay the bail after we are arrested? Do we rot in jail or are we supposed to be die of hunger-strike which we shall take recourse to if we are detained?

It seems the arrest warrant has not yet reached the SP of Pondicherry. We have to take one step at a time and see what unfolds and how it unfolds. The Order directing for our arrest is produced below.

The Root Cause and Synopsis of Fourteen Years of Litigation

Jayashree’s brutal assault on 09.01.2001 and our persistent demand for justice from the trustees resulted in 14 years of litigation starting from 23.03.2001 till date. It is interesting to note the manner in which Krishna Chandra, who had assaulted Jayashree, and even his sister were greatly rewarded by the trustees. After undergoing a short probation period they were made ashramites and presently enjoy all the facilities and amenities of the Ashram but we are being denied the same. This is spiritual justice so claim the unspiritual power-hungry trustees.

From 09.01.2001 for more than two months we were persistent in our demand for justice for Jayashree and patiently waited for the trustees to take action to that effect. Instead we came to know that the trustees were busy trying to suppress the assault on Jayashree by creating false circumstantial evidence in order to declare her to be a mental case. Hemlata threatened to go to the police and lodge a complaint on her sister’s behalf. Thus began a series of court cases. 

1. O.S. No.215/2001 (I Additional District Munsif at Pondicherry) – Hemlata vs. SAAT and its trustees – challenging the attempted illegal expulsion by the trustees. Suit is summarily terminated by the Madras High Court on 13.09.2002.
2. O.S. No.253/2001 (I Additional District Munsif at Pondicherry) – Jayashree, Arunashri, Rajyashri, Nivedita Vs. SAAT and its trustees – challenging the illegal show cause notice dated 02.04.2001. Suit is dismissed on 09.03.2007.
3. S.T.R. No.864/2001 (Judicial Magistrate I at Pondicherry) – Hemlata vs. Harikant Patel, Veda Prakash Johar, Manoj Das Gupta, Dilip Datta, Albert Paterl, Krishna Belliappa, Manjunath, Satyanarayanamurthy, - filed for defamation against the above-named accused persons. Magistrate visited Sri Aurobindo Ashram with Matriprasad and enjoyed the hospitality of the trustees. He was totally comprised and he wrongly acquitted the accused on 23.11.2004
4. C.R.P. No. 2230/2001 & No. 2534/2001 in O.S.No.253/2001 (Madras High Court) – two revisions filed by sisters and the trustees against each other challenging different portions of the order passed in I.A. No.935/2001 in O.S. No.253/2001. Common order was passed on 29.10.2001 disposing off both the CRPs.
5. C.R.P. No.787/2002 (Madras High Court) – SAAT and its trustees vs. Hemlata – trustees challenge the order passed in I.A. No. 2672/2001 in O.S. No.215/2001. Since the trustees had claimed that prior to expelling Hemlata they had conducted an “in camera enquiry”, the Hon’ble Trial Court had not permitted the trustees to constitute a second enquiry against her by appointing Suresh Chandra De as enquiry officer. So they filed this CRP under Article 227 of the Constitution. Order passed on 13.09.2002 terminating O.S. No.215/2001 because trustees give undertaking of restoring all facilities as inmate to Hemlata. Mr. Menon is appointed as the enquiry officer by the High Court of Madras. He is the third enquiry officer in a third enquiry-proceedings for the same alleged offence of misconduct.
6. Contempt No.718/2002 (Madras High Court) - SAAT and its trustees vs. 4 sisters - trustees file a contempt proceedings against five sisters. They have appointed Suresh Chandra De (IPS) as enquiry officer. We challenge his appointment enquiry at Pondicherry. Orders passed on 24.01.2003 stating no contempt of court committed by sisters.
7. O.S. No.668/2002 (I Additional District Munsif at Pondicherry) – Hemlata vs. SAAT and its trustees – challenging the impugned report of Mr. Menon, the third enquiry officer. Trial underway for 4 years. Trustees have paid two times fine of Rs.2,000/- each for failing to conduct the trial.
8. F.I.R. No.213/2004 resulting in S.T.R. No.7919/2004 (Judicial Magistrate II at Pondicherry) – Pondicherry police (on behalf of Arunashri) vs. Girish Panda and others. The FIR was registered for the sexual harassment and attempt to molestation faced by Arunashri. We were never called to give evidence in the case. Accused were acquitted without a trial. No order copy was furnished to us by the police or from the JM II court.
9. O.S. No.409/2005 (Principal District Munsif at Pondicherry) – five sisters vs. SAAT and its trustees – challenging the impugned report of Mr. A.V. Nagarajan. This enquiry was constituted wrongly and with a malafide intention to thwart, suppress and frustrate our efforts to get justice for the sexual harassment faced by us. Trial underway for 4 years. Trustees have paid two times fine of Rs.2,000/- each for failing to conduct the trial.
10. C.M.A. No.7/2005 (Principal Sub Judge at Pondicherry) – SAAT and its trustees vs. Hemlata – trustees challenge the order passed in interim petition in I.A. No.2937/2002 in O.S. No.668/2002 granting Hemlata status quo as an inmate of Ashram and which restrains the trustees from denying, depriving and stopping all the facilities as provided to every inmate. Trustees' appeal dismissed on 30.01.2007.
11. C.M.A. No.35/2005 (Principal Sub Judge at Pondicherry) – SAAT and its trustees vs. five sisters – trustees challenge the order passed in interim petition in I.A. No.1500/2005 in O.S. No.409/2005 granting all five sisters status quo as inmates of Ashram and restrains the trustees from denying, depriving and stopping all the facilities as provided to every inmate.Trustees' appeal dismissed on 30.01.2007
12. Cr.Appeal No.477/2005 (Madras High Court) – Hemlata vs. Veda Prakash Johar, Manoj Das Gupta, Dilip Datta, Albert Paterl, Krishna Belliappa, Manjunath, Satyanarayanamurthy – challenging the order of acquittal passed in S.T.R. No.864/2001 by JM I, Pondicherry. Criminal Appeal is still pending.
13. A.S. No.24/2007 (Principal Sub Judge at Pondicherry) - four sisters Vs. SAAT and its trustees - sisters file appeal against the order 09.03.2007 dismissing O.S. No.253/2001. Orders passed on 09.04.2010 dismissing our appeal.
14. T.O.P. No.85/2007 (Principal District Judge) – Hemlata vs. SAAT and its trustees – transfer petition filed by Hemlata for conducting a joint trial of O.S. No.668/2002 and O.S. No.409/2005. TOP allowed on 23.09.2008 permitting joint trial. Trustees pay fine for the first time of Rs.375/-.
15. C.R.P. No.3037/2007 (Madras High Court) – SAAT and its trustees vs. Hemlata – trustees challenge the order passed in C.M.A. No.7/2005 passed by PSJ, Pondicherry which confirmed the order passed in I.A. No.2937/2002 in O.S.No.668/2002 granting Hemlata status quo as an inmate of Ashram and which restrained the trustees from denying, depriving and stopping all the facilities as provided to every inmate. Order passed on 19.12.2008 adopting the order passed in C.R.P. No.3314/2007.
16. C.R.P.No.3314/2007 (Madras High Court) – SAAT and its trustees vs. five sisters – trustees challenge the order passed in C.M.A. No.35/2005 passed by PSJ, Pondicherry which confirmed the order passed in I.A. No.1500/2005 in O.S.No.409/2005 granting Hemlata status quo as an inmate of Ashram and which restrained the trustees from denying, depriving and stopping all the facilities as provided to every inmate. Order dated 29.01.2008 is passed.
17. M.P. No.1/2008 in C.R.P.No.3314/2007 (Madras High Court) – SAAT and its trustees vs. five sisters – trustees seek to modify the Order dated 29.01.2008 passed in C.R.P. No.3314/2007 under the guise of clarification. Order dated 04.08.2008 is passed.
18. C.R.P. No.3759/2008 – (Madras High Court) – SAAT and its trustees vs. Hemlata – trustees challenge the order passed in T.O.P. No.85/2007 for conducting joint trial. On 28.11.2008 High Court passed an order directing to conduct simultaneous trial in O.S. No.668/2002 and O.S. No.409/2005. They have to be tried separately without one prejudicing the other.
19. M.P. No.2/2008 in C.R.P.No.3314/2007 (Madras High Court) – SAAT and its trustees vs. five sisters –Order dated 04.08.2008 passed in M.P. No.1/2008 in C.R.P. No.3314/2007 is a modified version of the order passed 29.01.2008 passed in C.R.P. No.3314/2007 under the guise of a clarification. For a second time trustees seek to modify to their convenience the high court order under the guise of clarification. Order dated 21.06.2010 is passed.
20. F.I.R. No.272/2010 (Chief Judicial Magistrate at Pondicherry) – Jayashree vs. Pondicherry Police – for getting directions to register an FIR for the assault denial of food which occurred on 22.07.2010 at Ashram Dining Room.
21. F.I.R. No.273/2010 (Chief Judicial Magistrate at Pondicherry) – Hemlata vs. Pondicherry Police – for getting directions to register an FIR for the assault denial of food which occurred on 22.07.2010 at Ashram Dining Room.
22. C.R.P. No.4219/2010 – SAAT and its trustees vs. five sisters – trustees challenge interim order passed in I.A. No.2094/2010 restoring food and all the basic amenities and facilities of the Ashram. On 22.07.2010 the trustees had forcibly and illegally implemented the exparte Order dated 21.06.2010 passed in M.P. No.2/2008 in C.R.P. No.3314/2007 and stopped our food and all facilities as inmates. Order dated 03.08.2012 is passed.
23. Contempt Petition No.1483/2010 (Madras High Court) – SAAT and its trustees vs. five sisters – trustees file contempt proceedings against us because we did not follow the unexecutable order dated 21.06.2010 since the third party prevented its execution. No contempt is held.
24. S.L.P. No.27620/2012 (Supreme Court) – five sisters vs. SAAT and its trustees – we challenge the order dated 03.08.2012 passed in C.R.P. No.4216/2010. Stay is granted on --- by Justice Gokhale and Justice Nijjar. Unexecutable final orders are passed under two minutes by Justice S.J. Mukhopadhaya and Justice Ranjan Gogoi on 29.04.2014 who do not even give us an opportunity to be heard.
25. Contempt No.395/2014 (Supreme Court) – SAAT and its trustees vs. five sisters – Trustees file contempt against five sisters for not following an unexecutable order dated 29.04.2014 passed by Justice S.J. Mukhopadhaya and Justice Ranjan Gogoi. Ironically, after visiting the Ashram and enjoying the hospitality of the trustees and … Justice S.J. Mukhopadhaya issues arrest warrant against the five sisters in spite of having gone through our letter where we express our inability to appear before the court because we have no means.

ULTA CHOR KOTAWAL KO DAATE – POLICE TAKEN TO TASK BY THIEF

This is a very apt saying in Hindi. The best example is of Mr. Justice Sudhanshu Jyoti Mukhopadhaya, a sitting judge of the Supreme Court, who for whatever reasons best known to him is making a laughing stock of himself, open to great ridicule and exposure. Isn’t it ironical that having himself indulged in wrongdoing Justice Mukhopadhaya is taking to task the innocent non-wrongdoers?

In the first ever sitting on 29.04.2014 in our SLP No.27620/2012 before him he makes a comment in the open court that he has previously visited the Ashram. Then he refuses to hear our counsel and under two minutes he passes orders not relating either to the relief sought for in the SLP by us or the relief sought for by the trustees in their counter. On professional grounds he should have recused himself at the very first instance since he had already enjoyed the hospitality of the trustees.

The order dated 29.04.2014 reeks of mischief and foul-play in the following way.

1. Order was passed under two minutes in our case which had been part-heard before a different bench.
2. The malicious order is passed in an interim petition and especially when the trial of the suit before the Trial Court has been underway for the past 4 years.
3. Our lawyers were literally threatened by these judges when they tried to present our case. No opportunity was given to us to put forward our case.
4. The suit has been filed by us challenging the impugned report manufactured by the trustees which stands on no evidence but only hearsay and rumors and assumptions, and wherein no specific allegation or charge has been made out against us and based on which trustees illegally try to expel us from the Ashram, without following principles of natural justice. The Order of the Supreme Court is for evicting  us. Magic!!! Isn’t it.
5. Gross violation of fundamental rights.
6. The relief is sought for neither by the trustees nor by us. This relief has been pulled out of the magic-hat of Justice S.J. Mukhopadhaya and Justice Ranjan Gogoi, without having first read the SLP and all pertinent documents. Even a simple perusal of our Plaint filed in the suit and attached as Annexure to our SLP would have sufficed to come to the right conclusions.

Some Highlights of the Harassment and Victimization faced by five sisters at the hands of the trustees

I list below several occasions when we sisters have been assaulted, harassed, victimized, either on the instructions of the trustees or by their henchmen acting out of self-interest. 

1. On 09.01.2001 at about 6.15 a.m. Jayashree Prasad, my eldest sister was brutally assaulted by one Krishnachander of Odhisha in front of Veda Prakash Johar (Ashram trustee and in-charge of Ashram Dining Room). He was then a voluntary worker at Ashram Dining Room wherein she was working and also Veda Prakash Johar’s protégé. As a reward of this assault he was made an inmate of the Ashram. (For more details read posting dated 09.01.2001)
2. On 23.03.2001 all the sisters are denied breakfast at Ashram Dining Room. Hemlata is manhandled by inmates Manjunath and Satyanarayanamurthy. We were denied breakfast as a punishment because we were presistent in our demand for action to be taken against Krishna Chandra who had assaulted Jayashree. We gave a written complaint to the police for denial of food, for assault on Jayashree and manhandling of Hemlata. (For more details read posting dated 23.03.2001)
3. On 03.08.2004 – Arunashri Prasad, my second elder sister, was attempted to be molested by one Chandramani Patel. He had been harassing her for quite some time by sending pornographic chits and making sexual advances which she was determinedly refusing. (For more details read postings dated 03.08.2004, 19.09.2004 and 13.10.2004)
4. On 01.06.2004 at about 8 a.m. I was beaten up by one inmate Dhiraj Bannerjee in front of my relatives who were present for no apparent cause except following trustees’ direction.
5. (For more details read posting dated 01.06.2006)
6. On 29.12.2006 at about 4 p.m. Arunashri Prasad was dragged by her hair and brutally beaten up by Subhashini Mohanty at the Ashram Laundry in front of its acting incharge.
7. (For more details read posting dated 29.12.2006)
8. On 22.07.2010 at about 12 p.m. Jayashree and myself we were beaten under instructions of the trustees by  Purushottam Kothari, Maya Khandelwal, Matriprasad, Jahnavi Ravikanti, and we were denied food at the Ashram Dining. The police were brought to the Ashram Dining Room to forcibly implement the Order of the Madras High Court dated 21.06.2010. (For more details read posting dated 22.07.2010)
9. On 25.11.2013 Jayashree is threatened and intimidated at about 3.00 a.m. by Michale Neville, Prashant, Chandramani Patel. (For more details read posting 30.11.2013)