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!

Blatant Miscarriage of Justice by Some Corrupt Supreme Court Judges

Together with the active help, support and willful wrong intervention of some judges of the Supreme Court of India, the trustees have legally harassed us using the backdoor entry under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. Justice Sudhanshu Jyoti Mukhopadhaya, Justice Ranjan Gogoi and Justice S.A. Bobde. A gist of their misuse of discretionary power of supervision is cited below.

We filed S.L.P. No.27620/2012 against the illegal order of eviction dated 03.08.2012 passed by Justice S. Manikumar. Our SLP was part-heard by Justice Gokhale and Justice Nijjar, who granted a stay over the High Court Order. Suddenly our SLP was preponed, under mysterious circumstances, by 1 ½ months from 15.07.2014 to 29.09.2014. 

1. The transfer of our S.L.P. No.27620/2012 from a bench which had part-heard the case to a bench comprising of Justice Ranjan Gogoi and Justice Sudhanshu Jyoti Mukhopadhya, which had never heard the case, is totally against all legal norms, especially in view of the fact that neither party had made any written submission praying for transfer. Justice R. Gogoi and Justice S.J. Mukhopadhya should not have entertained S.L.P. No.27620/2012 under this circumstance.
2. Justice Gogoi and Justice Mukhopadhya failed to give a fair opportunity to us to hear our case but showed open hostility to our lawyers, to the extent of even threatening our lawyers.
3. In fact Justice S. J. Mukhopadhya had even visited Sri Aurobindo Ashram and the Grace Office of the trustees, as he himself claimed in the open court. Therefore on professional grounds he should not have heard S.L.P. No.27620/2012, much less pass perverse orders in his first ever hearing.
4. Justice Gogoi and Justice Mukhopadhya did not give any reason to arrive at the conclusion that they came to. After threatening our lawyers, they simply passed an order under two minutes, without realizing the civil implications involved and the grievous consequences resulting in human rights violation.
5. Justice Gogoi and Justice Mukhopadhya ought to have abstained from passing any order of this nature, especially in view of the fact that the suit in O.S. No.409/2005 has been undergoing trial since the past 4 years. They ought to have waited for the result of the trial before passing their order of illegal eviction on an interim petition granting us food, shelter, medical, clothing and other basics.
6. Justice Gogoi and Justice Mukhopadhya violated our fundamental rights as citizens of India with regard to our food, shelter, clothing and a right to live with dignity, especially in view of the fact that as inmates of Sri Aurobindo Ashram we receive no money. They directed us to be thrown head-first into a world where we cannot survive and are more likely to be further harassed by the henchmen of the trustees, with possibility of even molestation, rape and murder.
7. Justice R. Gogoi and Justice S.J. Mukhopadhaya have passed order dated 29.04.2014 directing us to vacate “suit premises” in a case in which we have challenged the impugned report regarding sexual harassment fabricated by the trustees. The suit contains no description of suit premises, therefore their order dated 29.04.2014 is null and void and non-executable.

We filed contempt proceedings against the trustees because they stopped our  facilities of food, medical and all other basic needs, necessities and amenities. We sent this contempt petition through RPAD to Justice R. Gogoi and Justice S.L. Mukhopadhaya. These judges have also received our petition on 05.08.2014 but have failed to take it up and give us relief.

Instead on 13.09.2014 Justice S.J. Mukhopadhaya visited the Ashram at Pondicherry and enjoyed trustees’ hospitality. Thereafter on 15.09.2014, just two days later, he initiated contempt proceedings in the contempt petition filed by the trustees and obliged the trustees. We sent our letter to the Registrar of the Supreme Court intimating that we have no means to appear before the court. This letter was received by the Registrar and is clearly mentioned in his office report dated 10.10.2014. The contempt petition filed by the trustees against us was posted on 13.10.2014.

1. Justice S.J. Mukhopadhaya and Justice S. Bobde ought not to have entertained the contempt petition filed by the trustees since the Order dated 29.04.2014 directs vacating of “suit premises” in a case which contains no description of the alleged “suit premises”.
2. In spite of having office order dated 10.10.2014 placed before Justice S.J. Mukhopadhaya and Justice S. Bobde, they refused to accept our plea of no means to appear, without even verifying from independent sources its truth.
3. Justice S.J. Mukhopadhaya and Justice S. Bobde issued bailable arrest warrant without going into the merits of the case and the executability of the Order dated 29.04.2014 passed in S.L.P. No.27620/2012.
4. Justice S.J. Mukhopadhaya and Justice S. Bobde have misused their powers of discretion and superintendence under Article 227 on an interim petition, while the suit is undergoing trial and directed arrest without going into the facts and ascertaining the truth.

Blatant Misuse of Powers under Article 227 by Some Corrupt Madras High Court Judges

Together with the active help, support and willful wrong intervention of two judges of the Madras High Court, the trustees have legally harassed us using the backdoor entry under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. These judges are Justice K. Venkataraman and Justice S. Manikumar. A gist of their misuse of discretionary power of supervision is cited below.

1. Justice K. Venkataraman wrongly entertained C.R.P. No.3314/2007, filed under Article 227 by the trustees on an interim petition granting food, shelter, clothing, medical and all other basic needs and necessities of life. He passed perverse order on 29.01.2008 containing reliefs neither asked by the trustees nor by us.
2. Justice K. Venkataraman wrongly entertained M.P. No.1/2008 in C.R.P. No.3314/2007, again filed by trustees for clarification, using for a second time Article 227. He indiscriminately exercised his powers of supervision for a second time and passed perverse order dated 04.08.2008 illegally modifying his first order dated 29.01.2008, containing reliefs neither asked by the trustees nor by us.
3. Justice K. Venkataraman wrongly entertained M.P. No.2/2008 in C.R.P. No.3314/2007, again filed by trustees for a second clarification, for a third time, again using Article 227. He indiscriminately exercised his powers of supervision for a third time and passed perverse exparte order dated 21.06.2010 illegally modifying his first two orders dated 29.01.2008 and 04.08.2008, containing reliefs neither asked by the trustees nor by us.
4. Justice K. Venkataraman ought to have issued notices to us either through court or directed the trustees to issue private notices to us, in view of the fact that our lawyer had given up Vakalat. He unjustly passed an order dated 21.06.2010 in our absence without giving us a just and fair opportunity to defend ourselves.
5. Having appointed suo motto an Advocate Commissioner, Justice K. Venkataraman failed to base his order dated 21.06.2010 on the report of the Advocate Commissioner. He waited for about 1 ½ years from the date of submission of the report of the Advocate Commissioner to pass his order dated 21.06.2010. He passed exparte order after having unjustly eschewed the line contained in the report that clearly indicated the harassment and victimization caused by Ashram trustees to us.
6. The orders passed by Justice K. Venkataraman dated 29.01.2008, 04.08.2008 and 21.06.2010, using his discretionary power of supervision under Article 227, are perverse, bad in law and were illegally modified under guise of clarification to metamorphose into an eviction proceeding which was not the prayer of the trustees in any of their petitions in the first place.
7. Justice K. Venkataraman and Justice S. Manikumar wrongly entertained C.R.P. No.4219/2010 filed by the trustees, once again under Article 227. They blatantly misused discriminatory supervisory powers and admitted the CRP since the trustees had failed to prefer an appeal at the Pondicherry Appellate Authority and had jumped the necessary legal steps before approaching High Court.
8. Justice K. Venkataraman and Justice S. Manikumar wrongly entertained C.R.P. No.4219/2010 filed by the trustees under Article 227, on an interim petition restoring food and shelter to us since the third party had failed to comply with the Order dated 21.06.2010.
9. Justice S. Manikumar passed perverse order dated 03.08.2012 in C.R.P. No.4219/2010 disregarding the principles of natural justice, balance of convenience and facts and circumstances of the case. He based his order dated 03.08.2012 by further modifying the three illegal orders already passed in C.R.P. No.3314 of 2007 dated 29.01.2008, 04.08.2008 and 21.06.2010 by Justice K. Venkataraman, by colluding with him.
10. Justice S. Manikumar passed final order after more than one year (containing two summer vacations) of hearing the final arguments. He failed to appreciate the case in C.R.P. No.4219/2010 on its own merits because the facts and circumstances and cause of action were different from those in C.R.P. No.3314/2010 and deserved impartial and independent evaluation of the case.
11. Since trial in O.S. No.409/2005 had already begun and was underway, Justice K. Venkataraman and Justice S. Manikumar ought to have waited for the final outcome of the trial before passing orders dated 21.06.2010 and 03.08.2012. They wrongly entertained revisions on interim injunction petitions, exercised discriminate supervisory powers under Article 227 and passed outright eviction orders, a prayer neither made by the trustees nor by us, resulting in an absolutely blatant miscarriage of justice.

Arrest Warrant not yet Received informs Pondicherry Police

The last weekend in the “Times of India” Bosco Dominque reported that arrest warrant has been issued against we five sisters for disobeying the Supreme Court Order. He reports that and I quote

“The court refused to buy the argument of the sisters that they were ready to appear before it but had no money to pay for their tickets, boarding and lodging.”

Was Bosco present in the Supreme Court or is he simply vomiting the cock-and-bull story of the trustees and indulging in one side reporting? It is also pertinent to note that the trustees are not highlighting the fact that Jayashree was assaulted, an event accepted by them in their various court pleadings. Bosco incorrectly reports the beginning of litigation only from 2002 after Mr.Menon’s enquiry was initiated and completed. But the truth is that our litigation began in 2001 because Jayashree was assaulted by Krishna Chandra (a non-ashramite) and because we protested since no relief was given to her. The trustees rewarded the assaulter as well as his sister by inducting them as inmates, whereas we have been facing 14 years of harassment, victimization, sexual harassment and various other indignities. What a great sense of justice of the trustees!

Anyhow after reading this news item, on 20/10/2014 Arunashri and I met the IGP of Pondicherry to learn about the arrest procedures. IGP Mr. Praveer Ranjan was kind enough to give us an audience. When we asked him about the arrest procedure he directed us to his secretary Mr. Rajashankar, who informed us that till date no arrest warrant has as yet been received by the police. He informed us that in the absence of the warrant it was difficult to say what is expected of the police. But he assured us that if arrest is made the procedure will be followed as per the directions issued and that no arrest will be made after 6 pm.

I reiterate the fact that we sisters have not disobeyed the Supreme Court Order dated 29.04.2014 passed in S.L.P.No.27620/2012 by Justice S.J. Mukhopadhaya and Justice R. Gogoi and no contempt can be held against us since their order directs us to vacate ‘suit premises’ in a case where there is no suit mentioned property. How can eviction be ordered in a suit which challenges the malafide report fabricated by the trustees in order to hush up our complaints of sexual harassment? This tantamounts to further victimization of the victims especially because some of our complaints form part of W.P.No.695/2014 pending before the Chief Justice of India and also because the case is being tried for the past four years. It seems as if the Supreme Court is incapable of rendering justice to the detriment of the victims.

Let us wait and watch what the future holds for us.

Trustees Have a Bad Habit of Initiating False Contempt Proceedings

These are the contempt proceedings initiated by the trustees against the five sisters:

1. Contempt No.718/2002 filed in O.S. No.253/2001 September 2002. No contempt was recorded against my four elder sisters. (See posting dated 24.01.2003)
2. Contempt No.1483/2010 filed in M.P. No.2/2008 in C.R.P. No.3314/2007 dated 21.06.2010. No contempt was recorded. Justice Manikumar took exception to our use of word ‘illegal’ when mentioning about Justice Venkataraman’s order. Justice Manikumar said that how can an order passed by a court of law be illegal, knowing fully well that illegal was an appropriate description. We apologized unconditionally for our use of this word illegal vis-à-vis high court order. But no contempt was recorded against we five sisters. The trustees’ claim to the contrary can be clearly seen by a simply perusal of the order.
3. Contempt No.395/2014 filed in S.L.P. No.27620/2012 dated 29.04.2014. Arrest warrant has been wrongly ordered by Justice S.J. Mukhopadhaya on 13.10.2014 since

• Order dated 29.04.2014 was passed by Justice S.J. Mukhopadhaya and Justice Ranjan Gogoi without following principles of natural justice and by misusing the discretionary powers under Article 227 of the Constitution in an interim petition, especially when trial had already began in the suit for the past 4 years.
• Order dated 29.04.2014 is non-executable. It directs the five sisters to vacate ‘suit premises’ in a case of sexual harassment where there is no description of ‘suit premises’.
• Office order dated 10.10.2014 states that we have received a letter from five sisters where the sisters have mentioned their inability to appear since they have no means. In spite of going through our letter and office order, Justice Mukhopadhaya has failed to take our plea into account.

We have to wait and watch whether this time round the trustees will manage to get us punished for an act of contempt we did not commit !!!

Tresor Nursing Home – Secret Refuge of Trustees’ Immorality

Tresor Nursing Home and Chitra Sen are synonymous in the Ashram community.

Ms. Chitra Sen is an old inmate, teacher & sports captain of the Ashram and heads the Advisory Committee Board of the Sri Aurobindo Ashram Trust. She also allots work to the inmates and devotees. She also listens to their grievances without any authority to act on her own accord, in other words she is a puppet of the trustees.

Tresor Nursing Home, a unit of Swasthya Trust, is situated on a property belonging to Sri Aurobindo Ashram Trust - “Tresor House”. The nursing home is her private and personal business. She has boldly voiced this her before appropriate authority.

SAAT has its own private nursing home on the beach road, dispensary, pharmacy, various therapy centers spread all over the white town and maintained by it for the well-being of its inmates, beneficiaries and devotees.

When crores of rupees has already been invested for this super-infrastructure, why is an elderly ashramite, juggling so many responsibilities, allowed to run her own private business with the blessings of the SAAT trustees, especially on an Ashram property? The answer is very simple but shocking.

Pregnancy is an accepted, normal and almost inevitable incident in the Ashram whether it’s a maid-servant, paid worker in a farmland or an ashramite. This fact is shocking but not so to the old ashramites who have witnessed pregnancies, abortions and childbirths in the Ashram. The women range maid-servant to affluent ladies.

The Mother in Her wisdom always protected women in the Ashram in every way. Stories are also told about how the Mother treated these cases. She permitted some for undergoing abortion and requested some to go for child delivery at the cost of the Ashram. Even today some of these lady-inmates are still alive and well respected in the ashram community along with their off-springs.

Unlike the era of the Mother when She guided and took the responsibility of each ashramite in Her spiritual wisdom, the present trustees (not selected by the Mother) indulge in every activity contrary to the aim and ideal of the Ashram. They are not only aware of the prevailing sexual activities, but enjoy and support the same openly.

Sexual advances are a common pass time in the Ashram and every woman has her own story. Sexual gratifications are procured to entertain VIPs, to become an Ashramite and to be in good books of the trustees. In case these so called “sadhikas” become pregnant trustees of SAAT take good care of them by providing them with appropriate medications, treatment and facilities.

This is where Tresor Nursing Home and Chitra Sen play their secret grand roles. Tresor Nursing Home takes care of all pregnancy cases of the Ashram in the name of D&C. Thus the image of these women remains clean in the Ashram community. But Chitra Sen maintains a comprehensive report about it for the benefit of the trustees of SAAT.

Tresor Nursing Home offers multifaceted approach to well-being and treatment, thus it is open to all including ashramites. Once a report of ‘services rendered’ is submitted, the Ashram dispensary reimburses Tresor Nursing Home for treatments extended its inmates.

You may wonder why I am washing dirty linen in public. Here are the astounding facts.

1. When the assault on Jayashree took place in the Ashram Dining Room on 09/01/2001 I was working as the secretary to Chitra Sen helping her in the Ashram related work. I had raised questions and objections before Chitra Sen with regard to Jayashree’s assault. But she always maintained a hostile convenient silence. Once I had also heard her talk over phone to a psychiatrist called Dr. Unni, for Jayashree’s treatment. When I squarely challenged her she kept quiet. So I knew something was fishy.
2. After Hemlata filed her civil suit in O.S. No.215/2001, i.e. 23/03/2001, a defamatory letter was sent to her. When she issued a legal notice to the trustees, they began scrambling for evidence. Mr. PP Raghavachary (inmate lawyer of SAAT) and Mr. C.S.Narasimhan suddenly began visiting frequently Tresor Nursing Home. When I asked them the reason for their visits they kept mum. In fact, every time they turned up I was asked to leave the premises under some pretext.
3. On 03/04/2001 Hemlata filed her criminal complaint for defamation against the trustees and their henchmen, which they came to know about even before receipt of court-summons. The trustees were enraged at being cited as accused so they issued illegal backdated show cause notice to my three elder sisters and to me. The show cause notice indicated that we had already been found guilty, though no enquiry had been conducted, and why trustees should punish us.
4. Thus on the 7^th of April 2001, trustees decided to punish without even giving me the chance to defend myself. Chitra Sen simply asked me to stop working without assigning any reason. I was forced to hand over the office keys, which I did with a covering letter asking the reason for stopping my work. Till date that letter remains unanswered.
5. On the same date the trustees of SAAT pulled in Tresor Nursing Home and associated it with Hemlata’s alleged pregnancy in order to hush up Jayashree’s assault on 09/01/2001. This we came to know through the Reply Notice issued answering her Legal Notice to the trustees.

A simple protest by us against the assault on Jayashree took such an ugly turn only because a few can stand firm against injustice. This hurt the ego of the male chauvinistic trustees and their henchmen. Today trustees and their henchmen (ashramites, ex-students of SAICE & trustees’ well wishers) beat the drum falsely alleging that Hemlata was in an advance stage of pregnancy of 6-7 months. She violated the so-called golden rule of the Ashram and therefore must be expelled from the Ashram. But, then why no one raised any voice against Krishna Belliappa who became an Ashramite in 2001 and who was not expelled. While Hemlata’s character is repeatedly tainted, no action is taken against Krishna Belliappa who enjoys the status of the ashramite till date.

Why did the trustees associate his name with Hemlata? The reason is so stupid that it is laughable.

In the Ashram everybody is only known by their first name. When Krishna Chandra assaulted Jayashree, trustees tried to suppress this fact since the Oriya threatened to walk out of Dining Room en mass. Since the Dining Room primarily functions on Oriya strength, this boycott would have been a big headache for the trustees. In order to confuse which Krishna was involved, Krishna Pandya being too old, sincere unaccommodating, Krishna Belliappa, the newly inducted ashramite was picked upon. Obviously he did not toe the line for free. He was elevated to the elite circle of conspirators and given full freedom to become a womanizer like his mentor Manoj Das Gupta.

This was corroborated by the fact when Jayashree, Arunashri and Hemlata went to the Police Station. A senior police officer Mr. Anand Mohan seeing them in the police station pointed at Jayashree and asked which Krishna had made her pregnant?

With regard to Krishna - Mahabharata war ensued because of one Sri Krishna. What is going to be the fate of the Ashram trustees and their well wishers when they have heavily relied upon these two Krishnas?

A Bird’s Eye-view of Suit O.S. No.409/2005

After issuing show cause notice to us, which did not mention any charges leveled against us, and without furnishing a complete copy of A.V. Nagarajan’s report dated 10.01.2005 (which also did not contain any specific charges leveled against us), the trustees began issuing and pasting expulsion letters on our doors. We were given no opportunity to defend ourselves. (See details on posting dated 07.02.2005). The dates of events which occurred thereafter are highlighted hereunder. 

1. 25.04.2005 - O.S. No.409/2005 filed before Principal District Munsif at Pondicherry
2. 28.04.2005 – Exparte interim injunction granting status quo is given to us in I.A. No.1500/2005 in O.S. No.409/2005 by an upright honest judicial officer, Mr. Krishnasamy.
3. 10.06.2005 – Interim injunction is made absolute after a thorough enquiry. We sincerely thank Mr. Krishnasamy (Judge of PDM) for his unwavering rendering of justice.
4. 01.07.2005 – Trustees disobey order of injunction and fail to provide ‘Prosperity Items’, which is given to every inmate to meet their daily and monthly needs since we do not receive any money.
5. Contempt Petition No.3782/2005 filed by us against trustees since they disobey court order. The contempt petition is still pending. (See posting on )
6. Trustees prefer appeal in C.M.A. No. 35/2005 at Pondicherry against the interim order dated 10.06.2005. Trustees’ Appeal is dismissed on 30.01.2007. Trial Court Order dated 10.06.2005 is upheld since the balance of convenience is in our favor.
7. Trustees file C.R.P. No.3314/2007 before Madras High Court challenging dismissal of their appeal on 30.01.2007. Order dated 29.01.2008 is passed. Justice K. Venkataraman directs us to reside in some other accommodation. We request for accommodation at ‘Golconde Guest House’.
8. Trustees file M.P. No.1/2008 in C.R.P. No. 3314/2007 for clarification of the order dated 29.01.2008 since they do not wish to accommodate us at ‘Golconde Guest House’. Order dated 04.08.2008 is passed and under the guise of clarification Justice K. Venkataraman modifies his own Order dated 29.01.2008. As directed we ask to be accommodated at ‘International Guest House’ and the ‘Sea Side Guest House’. (See posting on )
9. Trustees file M.P. No.2/2008 in C.R.P. 3314/2007, a second clarification petition, seeking to further modify the already modified order dated 04.08.2008.
10. Justice K. Venkataraman suo motto appoints an Advocate Commissioner. He directs the trustees and the sisters to state alternate accommodation which he will come and inspect and impartially judge the suitability of the accommodation. Advocate Commissioner comes to Pondicherry, visits the mentioned accommodations and submits his report on 23.12.2008 to the Madras High Court. His report is totally unfavorable to the trustees and completely exposes the harassment which the trustees are causing us. (See posting on )
11. The trustees are in a dilemma because of the Advocate Commissioner’s report and pressurize Justice K. Venkataraman to ignore the same. Justice K. Venkataraman has already been so thoroughly comprise that he blindly obeys the trustees. We write a letter to the Chief Justice of Madras High Court – Mr. Justice Gokhale and seek to transfer our case. (See posting on 14.10.2014)
12. Justice Gokhale ignores our complaint and orders Jusice K. Venkataraman to continue with the case. By now Justice K. Venkatarman has become openly hostile and begins to needlessly insult and berate our lawyer. With a heavy heart we request our lawyer to give up Vakalatnama. We were assured that notice will reach us through court and we can come and represent our case ourselves. No such thing happened.
13. On 21.06.2010, 1 ½ years after Advocate Commissioner has submitted his report, Justice Venkataraman passes exparte order in M.P.No.2/2008 in C.R.P. No.3314/2007 directing us to stay at ‘Jenny Working Women’s Hostel’. As per report of Advocate Commissioner this hostel has no vacancy.
14. On 22.07.2010 using Pondicherry police to intimidate us, Matriprasad, Maya Khandelwal, Jahnavi Ravikanti, Purushottam Kothari and others assault Jayashree and Hemlata and deny us food at Ashram Dining Room. (see posting dated )
15. On 27.10.2010, more than three months later our food is restored at through I.A. No.2094/2010 in O.S. No.409/2005, through the Pondicherry court by Mrs. R. Vasanthi, Hon'ble Judge of PDM. We wish to thank yet another upright judge who did not succumb to pressures from her superiors and trustees.
16. Trustees file revision in C.R.P. No. 4219/2010 challenging order dated 27.10.2010 in I.A. No.2094/2010 in O.S. No.409/2005, as well as Contempt Petition No.1483/2010, in Madras High Court. Justice K. Venkatarman is again presiding over these matters. With great difficulty our lawyers manage to transfer the case to the court of Justice S. Manikumar. Matter is extensively argued on both sides in April 2011. Then on 03.08.2012, more than 1 year later, Justice Manikumar passes order of eviction without stating any reason for the same.
17. The five sisters challenge this unjust order dated 03.08.2012 and file S.L.P. No. 27620/2012. Stay is granted by Justice Nijjar and Justice Gokhale.
18. Thereafter from 15.07.2014 the matter is suddenly preponed by 1 ½ months to 29.04.2014 when it comes up before a new bench and a non-executable order is passed on 29.04.2014 by Justice S.J. Mukhopadhaya and Justice Ranjan Gogoi. (see postings dated )
19. The trustees file Contempt Petition No.395/2014 and arrest warrant has been issued on 13.10.2014 by Justice S.J. Mukhopadhaya and Justice Bobde.

The trial in O.S. No.409/2005 has been underway for more about 4 years. Trustees are delaying and protracting the proceedings of the trial and till have been fined on two occasion for failing to continue with the trial. They paid fine of Rs.2,000/- each time.

It is most pertinent to note here that our case contains no description of any property. It is a case challenging the impugned report which had been fabricated to hush up, suppress, mislead, misguide and misrepresent our complaints of sexual harassment. Neither the we nor the trustees ever sought relief of eviction in any of the above-mentioned multiple proceedings. But astoundingly eviction has been ordered in a sexual harassment case and victims are further victimized by the above-mentioned judges of the Madras High Court and Supreme Court. Has justice now become blind and corrupt and willfully chooses to remain blindfolded?

Justice K. Venkataraman, Justice S. Manikumar, Justice S.J. Mukhopadhaya, Justice Ranjan Gogoi and Justice Bobde have all misused their discretionary powers under Article 227 of the Constitution. In spite of having written countless letters, unfortunately no one has as yet had the courage to take action against these judges and make them answerable for the gross miscarriage of justice.

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.

Some Corrupt Officers of Pondicherry Police cause Blatant Miscarriage of Justice

Many Officers of the Pondicherry police have been active helpers of the Ashram trustees. To name a few – Mr. J.P. Singh (IPG), Mr. Ananda Mohan (senior officer), Mr. Firoz Zia Hussain (SP North), Mr. Meena (IGP), Mr. N.T.Sivadasan (SP North), Mrs. Thamizharasi (SP), Mr. Srikant (SSP – Law & Order), Mrs. Chhaya Sharma (SSP – C&I), Mr. Varadarajan (SHO – Muthialpet)

But there have also been some upright impartial Police Officers – Mr. Krishnaiah (IGP), Mr. Chandran (SSP – Law & Order), Mr. Baskarane (senior officer)

I am citing instances where we sisters have been denied justice by Pondicherry Police.

1. On 23.03.2001 Hemlata gave a complaint of manhandling and assault but is issued with a Report in Non-Cognizable Offence on 24.03.2001, directing her to seek civil reliefs. (See posting dated 24.03.2001)
2. The complaint dated 05.08.2004 by Arunashri is never taken up. We sent this complaint by RPAD expecting police to play foul. They lived up to our expectations. The police deny having received this complaint but we have postal registration slip and A/D card to prove our point.
3. On 17.09.2004 police dictates complaint to register FIR. Most of Arunashri’s statement is overlooked but at least FIR No.213/2004 is registered. (see posting dated 19.09.2004)
4. On 13.10.2004 police issues summons to Arunashri for production of pornographic chits in FIR 213/2004. But since on the same day they have already received three fresh chits from our rooms at Ambabhikshu House, they don’t take the five original chits which are available with us. We still have them. (See posting dated 14.10.2004)
5. In spite of our repeated visits to Muthialpet police station, where FIR 213/2004 had been registered,  we were not kept informed about the proceedings of the criminal case in S.T.R. No.7919/2004 which was filed based on FIR No.213/2004 before Judicial Magistrate II at Pondicherry. We were never called to the court to give evidence. We were given no opportunity to cross-examine the accused. We came to know about the acquittal of accused first through NHRC’s Order dated 07.11.2005 but no order of acquittal has till date been furnished to us by the Pondicherry police. The only copy which we have received is through the trustees on 04.06.2007 when they filed the said Order of Acquittal in their typeset of documents in C.R.P. No.3314/2007.
6. We were denied food on 22.07.2010 by the trustees using the illegal intimidation of Pondicherry police. Even though Mr. Chandra Mohan (Chief Secretary in 2010) regretted the mistake of the police, they did not help us to restore it by appropriate directions to the trustees.

Produced below is the Order of Acquittal in S.T.R. No.7919/2004 furnished by the trustees to us. The Pondicherry Police buried this Order to harass us and help the trustees. Till date the police has not had the courtesy to give us a copy of this report.