Rti dated 06.10.2018 against SC

An inspector in the Punjab Police, Baljinder Singh, filed a petition seeking anticipatory bail in an FIR registered against him for illegally detaining and torturing the complainant, his son, and worker. The High Court dismissed the petition based on a SIT investigation report. The report found that while the complainant was not illegally detained on the date alleged, his son and worker were illegally detained and humiliated in the police station on a different date in the inspector's presence. As the station head, the inspector was still responsible for actions in his station. The court ruled the police actions unacceptable and that the inspector did not deserve discretionary relief.

RTI dated 31.05.2018

The document is a request for information filed under India's Right to Information Act regarding a case of non-implementation of section 7(1) of the RTI Act that resulted in the planned judicial murder of appellant Asha Rani Devi on November 11, 2017. The request seeks information from the Department of Justice on 8 questions related to a case in Begusarai court involving the appellant and accusations of a shielded magistrate. The request involves matters related to imminent danger to life and liberty and concerns cases filed in multiple states and the Supreme Court of India.

Add panappform

Testseries365

1. Asha Devi has applied for a Permanent Account Number (PAN) using Form 49A. She is providing her personal details like name, date of birth, address, father's name, and source of income which is salary. 2. She has included a copy of her Aadhaar card as proof of identity, address, and date of birth along with the application. 3. Asha Devi declares that the information provided in the application is true to the best of her knowledge.

Shiv kumar pnh hc mar 16 order

This document summarizes a court case regarding allegations of illegal detention and custodial torture of an individual named Shiv Kumar. The court ordered an independent inquiry by the District and Sessions Judge of Faridabad into the allegations. The court also ordered that the ongoing police investigation by the Special Investigation Team be allowed to continue but that they not submit a final report without permission from the court. The matter was scheduled for further hearing on May 11th for a status report on the independent inquiry and investigation.

First Appeal Online Receipt dated 11.04.2017

First Appeal against Non-disclosure of complaint Information at the Website of CIC New Delhi (In view of Section 7(1) of RTI Act 2005) Suppression of record concerning Life and Liberty at the website of CIC New Delhi alarms infiltration of bad elements inside the CIC and also raises serious concern for revamping the internal system of CIC New Delhi in the larger public interest and in the interest of protecting the very purpose of CIC as an anti-corruption institution.

This document is a second appeal filed with the Central Information Commission in India regarding information sought through Right to Information requests but not received. It summarizes previous requests and appeals filed with the Department of Legal Affairs in the Government of India and the Law Department of the Government of Bihar regarding frivolous legal cases filed against the appellant in 2010 and 2011. The appellant is seeking replies to 9 questions regarding the cases from the respondent departments.

Second Appeal against Patna High Court_03_11_2016

This document is a second appeal filed with the Central Information Commission regarding information requested under the Right to Information Act. The appellant had previously filed requests for information from the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court in Begusarai regarding two court cases there. In the second appeal, the appellant argues that the responses received contained false or incomplete information, and requests that true and complete information be provided regarding details of the two court cases.

Madras hc apr 1 order uidai

The court document discusses a case regarding a political party in Puducherry that allegedly conducted an unauthorized campaign by sending bulk SMS messages to citizens' phones linked to their Aadhar cards without permission from the Election Commission. The court notes serious privacy concerns and orders the Election Commission and UIDAI to investigate how the political party accessed personal citizen information. The court will hear the case again in 6 weeks to receive answers from the respondent authorities regarding compliance with election rules and protection of citizen privacy.

29.01.2021 abad hc order

- The document summarizes 3 writ petitions challenging the publication of petitioners' names on lists of top 10 criminals displayed at various police stations in Uttar Pradesh. - The petitioners argue this violates their right to privacy and dignity under Article 21 of the Indian constitution. They claim their inclusion on the lists is due to false cases or political vendettas. - The court heard arguments from the petitioners' counsel and amicus curiae on the right to privacy being integral to Article 21 and protected under Indian and international law. Displaying individuals' criminal histories and status violates this right if not done according to proper legal procedure.

RTI dated 22-03-2020 against Supreme Court of India

Comp cmk jsp2015-distadm-110415

1. The document outlines several ways in which the Palakkad district administration has failed to comply with government regulations and the Right to Information Act regarding providing receipts for documents submitted, proactively disclosing information, responding to information requests, and organizing previous citizen outreach programs. 2. Specific examples given include the failure to display boards about receipts as required by 2009 circular, lack of records disclosed as required by Section 4(1)(b) of RTI Act, rejecting RTI applications in violation of Section 5, and refusing to provide full information as required by Section 6(3). 3. The author argues that the district administration's non-compliance with basic transparency laws demonstrates a disregard for the authority

under the influence of alcohol or not when the accident took place

S.Ezhil Raj

The petitioner filed a criminal petition seeking to remove the allegation from an FIR that he was driving under the influence at the time of a car accident. The court denied the request, stating that the allegation is part of the complainant's version and subject to ongoing investigation. While the allegation alone does not prove drunken driving or prevent an insurance claim, it is not appropriate for the court to remove a statement that is being investigated. The petition was therefore closed without modifying the FIR.

Comp cmk jsp2015-cmk-140415

How to link a pan card with your aadhar

Vakilsearch

There are several ways to link a PAN card with an Aadhaar card. It can be done online in 2 steps without logging in or 6 steps by logging in to the Income Tax Department website. Details are verified and upon successful matching, the linking is complete. Alternatively, an SMS can be sent with the Aadhaar and PAN numbers to specified numbers to link them. Linking must be done by June 30, 2020 or the PAN card will be deactivated as per rules. It helps tackle multiple PAN cards, allows tax return processing, and prevents tax evasion.

Final Status of RTI dated 31.05.18

150522 exposing idiots and traitors amoung public servants-sharat sabharwal-i...

The Right to Information Act, 2005 has been subverted most blatantly and with impunity by the information commissioners appointed to enforce the very same law. Here is an e mail I had sent to Sharat Sabarwal, one such information commissioner at the Central Information Commission. This feedback on one of his orders amply illustrates how the law is being subverted by some of the worst traitors in the world!

Gulfisha fatima

The court order denies the application of accused Gulfisha Fatima for statutory bail under Section 167(2) of the CrPC. It notes that Gulfisha was arrested on April 11, 2020 in the present case. While over 183 days had passed since her arrest, the charge sheet was filed within the extended period of investigation on September 16, 2020. It also finds that the court has jurisdiction in this matter as per notifications and orders issued by the Delhi government and High Court designating the court to try cases related to the 2020 Delhi riots. Therefore, the court dismisses Gulfisha's application for statutory bail as no case for relief under Section 167(2) is made out.

Tasleem ahmed

The court denied the application of accused Tasleem Ahmed for statutory bail under Section 167(2) of the CrPC. Tasleem Ahmed had argued that he was entitled to bail as the police had not filed a charge sheet within 90 days of his arrest on June 24, 2020. However, the court noted that the charge sheet was in fact filed on September 16, 2020, within the 90 day period. The court also ruled that it had jurisdiction to hear the case, citing notifications and orders from the Delhi government and High Court designating it as a special court to try cases related to the 2020 Delhi riots.

Saleem khan

The Additional Sessions Judge of Shahdara District Court in Delhi dismissed the application of accused Saleem Khan for statutory bail under Section 167(2) of the CrPC. Khan argued he was entitled to bail as the police had not filed a charge sheet within 90 days of his arrest on June 25, 2020. However, the court noted the charge sheet was in fact filed on September 16, 2020, within the 90 day period. The court also affirmed it had jurisdiction to hear the case as it had been designated as a Special Court for trial of cases relating to 2020 Delhi riots by orders of the Delhi High Court and Lieutenant Governor of Delhi.

Justice raja judgment

This document is a court judgment regarding a request made under the Right to Information Act for details of corrupt police officers in Kerala. The State Information Commission ordered the disclosure of information regarding officers convicted of corruption or human rights violations, or against whom a final police report was submitted to court. However, details of officers under ongoing investigation were not to be disclosed. The petitioners challenged this order, arguing the State Crime Records Bureau is exempt from RTI requests. The court heard arguments from both sides and the judgment discusses the issues around applying exemptions for ongoing investigations versus ordering disclosure of certain established misconduct details.

Defects Cure letter dated 19.09.2018 to section x SC

The petitioner filed a misc. application that was objected to by the Branch Officer for including improper prayers B and C. The petitioner then redrafted those prayers and refiled the application. However, the Branch Officer is now instructing the petitioner over the phone to remove those key prayers from the application. The petitioner refuses to do so as it would invalidate the application. The petitioner questions why the application has not been properly processed or listed for hearing according to the rules.

Ciap member's contact information update form

Saleem Mohammed

This document contains instructions for CIAP members to update their contact information on file. The form requests members to provide their CIAP number, title, name, date of birth, mobile number, email address, physical address, city, pin code, district, state and an attached document for address proof in all capital letters. Members must declare that the information is correct, authorize CIAP to use it for future contact and electronic voting, and agree to inform CIAP of any future changes.

Reply of FAA CIC dated 19.03.2018

Vinson m paul cic ksic-idiot or traitor- you decide

1. The document discusses a complaint filed with the Kerala State Information Commission regarding a response to a Right to Information (RTI) application. 2. The complainant had filed an RTI application with the Village Office, Pudussery Central seeking information about computer systems used in the office. When no response was received, he filed first and second appeals which also received no response. 3. In his decision, the Chief Information Commissioner noted that the complainant was absent from the hearing scheduled to address the complaint. The Commissioner determined that providing access to inspect documents was sufficient response to the original RTI application.

RTI Request against CIC dated 5.1.2017

Final status of PMOPG/E/2018/0480386 dated 09.10.2018

The complainant filed a criminal miscellaneous petition with the Supreme Court of India which raised three defects by the registry. The complainant cured all three defects but the file has now gone missing from the registry. The complainant is seeking a urgent reply from the registry on whether the criminal appeal will be registered and what action has been taken against the appeal. The grievance is currently under process by the Joint Secretary Shri S.C. Barmma at the Prime Minister's Office in New Delhi.

RTI dated 7.12.22 against suppression of Gang Rape matter.pdf

OmPrakashPoddar1

Supreme Court of India is main accused in Non Bail able Warrant and Gang Rape matter W.P.(Crl.) D.NO. 18546/2022. Sixteen petitions (SLP. Writ, Review, Curative and M.A) have been filed against interlinked with this matter since 2012 to till date, yet no rescue of 18 year ago kidnapped pregnant wife Rina Kumari (Guddi) and abducted unseen minor daughter from the clutches of sex Abusers State by Supreme Court of India and Union of India as on date

What's hot

Second Appeal against Department of Legal Affairs dated 3_11_ 2016

Second Appeal against Patna High Court_03_11_2016

Madras hc apr 1 order uidai

29.01.2021 abad hc order

RTI dated 22-03-2020 against Supreme Court of India

Comp cmk jsp2015-distadm-110415

under the influence of alcohol or not when the accident took place

S.Ezhil Raj

Comp cmk jsp2015-cmk-140415

How to link a pan card with your aadhar

Vakilsearch

Final Status of RTI dated 31.05.18

150522 exposing idiots and traitors amoung public servants-sharat sabharwal-i...

Gulfisha fatima

Tasleem ahmed

Saleem khan

Justice raja judgment

Defects Cure letter dated 19.09.2018 to section x SC

Ciap member's contact information update form

Saleem Mohammed

Reply of FAA CIC dated 19.03.2018

Vinson m paul cic ksic-idiot or traitor- you decide

RTI Request against CIC dated 5.1.2017

What's hot (20)

Second Appeal against Department of Legal Affairs dated 3_11_ 2016

Second Appeal against Patna High Court_03_11_2016

Madras hc apr 1 order uidai

29.01.2021 abad hc order

RTI dated 22-03-2020 against Supreme Court of India

Comp cmk jsp2015-distadm-110415

under the influence of alcohol or not when the accident took place

Comp cmk jsp2015-cmk-140415

How to link a pan card with your aadhar

Final Status of RTI dated 31.05.18

150522 exposing idiots and traitors amoung public servants-sharat sabharwal-i...

Gulfisha fatima

Tasleem ahmed

Saleem khan

Justice raja judgment

Defects Cure letter dated 19.09.2018 to section x SC

Ciap member's contact information update form

Reply of FAA CIC dated 19.03.2018

Vinson m paul cic ksic-idiot or traitor- you decide

RTI Request against CIC dated 5.1.2017

Similar to Rti dated 06.10.2018 against SC

Final status of PMOPG/E/2018/0480386 dated 09.10.2018

RTI dated 7.12.22 against suppression of Gang Rape matter.pdf

OmPrakashPoddar1

Brinda karat and anr. v. state and anr. (defects cleared)

The petitioners have challenged an order passed by the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate dismissing their application under Section 156(3) of the CrPC seeking investigation and registration of an FIR for alleged hate speech by two Members of Parliament. The Magistrate held that prior sanction under Section 196 CrPC was required at this initial stage, which was not obtained. The petitioners argue that sanction is only required at the stage of cognizance, not investigation under Section 156(3). They further argue that the cases relied upon by the Magistrate are distinguishable and that requiring sanction at this stage would hamper access to justice. The petitioners seek quashing of the impugned order and issuance of directions.

Second appeal under RTI Act 2005 against Department of legal affairs dated 3....

Madras hc anti caa cases quashed

The court quashed criminal proceedings against two petitioners who were accused of protesting against the Citizenship Amendment Act in 2019. The court found that while the petitioners' protest was unlawful for lacking proper permission, it was a peaceful protest and no criminal acts occurred. Further, witness statements did not properly identify the petitioners as being involved. Prior court rulings established the right to peaceful protest. Thus, the court concluded there was no prima facie evidence against the petitioners and continuing the prosecution would be an abuse of process.

Saathik ali v state

The petitioner filed a criminal original petition in the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court to quash an FIR registered against him and others for conducting a peaceful demonstration against the CAA and NRC amendments. While there was prima facie evidence for an FIR, the court noted that no untoward incidents occurred during the peaceful protest. Since continued prosecution was not warranted given the lack of violence, the court quashed the FIR to secure the ends of justice, with the benefit also applying to the non-petitioning accused mentioned in the FIR.

Madras hc jan 21 order

1) The petitioner, M. Ananthan, was arrested in 2018 for drug offenses involving commercial quantities of ganja and has been in judicial custody since. 2) While the petitioner satisfies one requirement for bail under the NDPS Act by not having a criminal record, the court found he did not satisfy the second requirement that he is not likely to have committed the offense based on evidence. 3) However, the court determined the petitioner's right to a speedy trial had been violated as the trial had not commenced for over two years. As such, the court directed the prosecution to pay compensation of Rs. 1 lakh and for the trial to conclude within three months.

Justice

Raj Garg

This document provides information on the Right to Information (RTI) Act including: - The time limit to receive a response to an RTI application is generally 30 days. An additional 5 days may be allowed if the application is submitted to an Assistant Public Information Officer. - Failure to provide information within this time period is considered a deemed refusal. The applicant can then file a first appeal. - The first appeal is made to the First Appellate Authority, who is at a senior level than the Public Information Officer. The first appeal must be filed within 30 days of receiving the PIO's response or deemed refusal. - If still unsatisfied, the applicant can file a second appeal with the

Second Appeal dated 21.04.2017 before CIC New Delhi against Non-disclosure of...

Written submission for hearing D.NO.183721

This document is a written submission filed on behalf of the appellant Om Prakash Poddar regarding an appeal before the Central Information Commission in New Delhi. The submission argues that the failure to provide information in a previous Right to Information request led to the planned murder of appellant's wife Asha Rani Devi. It requests the Information Commissioner to order the respondent department to provide the information sought in the second appeal and to take punitive action against the Central Public Information Officer for delays. The matter is linked to other appeals previously filed regarding the murder. The appellant fears that further delays in this case could lead to his own murder.

Written Submission for Hearing D.NO.119689

First Appeal dated 16.03.2018 against CIC

First Appeal against misleading RTI reply by Mr. Krishan Talwar, Deputy Secretary and CPIO, CIC New Delhi pertaining to Life and liberty of an underground Appellant in the garb of section 2 (f) of the RTI Act 2005 CPIO says, "advise, response to queries/questions, opinion, reason are not covered under section 2(f) of RTI Act, 2005". However, RTI request is very much covered under section 2(f) of RTI Act 2005. As per the definition of section 2(f) of RTI Act 2005, Section 2(f) of RTI Act 2005 reads as "information" means any material in any form, including records, documents, memos, e-mails, opinions, advices, press releases, circulars, orders, logbooks, contracts, reports, papers, samples, models, data material held in any electronic form and information relating to any private body which can be accessed by a public authority under any other law for the time being in force”.

Writ Petition Criminal diary no. 18546 of 2022 Part-II .pdf

Register F.I.R against these five people to interrogate in this matter. Surender Narayan Poddar, Rajput advocate of Purnea Bihar, Advocate Gopal Prasad and his wife Veena Kumari Advocate Sunil Ojha is key person who will reveal all records of this sex racket to rescue my minor daughters. Register an F.I.R and interrogate Shri Surender Narayan Poddar Assitant Manager Marketing Division IOCL Barauni Refinery Begusarai Bihar, my advocate Shri Sunil Ojha in HMA-678/2010 case at Dwarka Court at New Delhi, my wife Rina Kumari’s advocate Shri Gopal Prasad and his wife Veena Kumari in 9P/2010 case at Begusarai Court Bihar and Rajput advocate of Purnea Bihar in HMA-678/2010 case Goshwara No. 83)H at Dwarka Court at New Delhi.

Online Complaint against MOLAJ dated 16.08.2016

Application for Written Arguments for the date of hearing on 31.10.2022 in An...

Most important judgement for filing of form GST TRAN-1

CA PRADEEP GOYAL

Adfert Technologies Pvt. Ltd. (Petitioner) Versus Union of India & Ors. (Respondents) CWP No.30949 of 2018(O&M) Date of Decision:-04.11.2019 Punjab & Haryana High Court decided on two types of cases namely (i) registered persons who did/could not file TRAN-1 by 27.12.2017 and have no evidence of attempt to load TRAN-1 (ii) registered persons loaded TRAN-1 by 27.12.2017 but there is mistake and they want to revise already loaded TRAN-1.

Rajesh singh v state of up

The court document summarizes a writ petition filed by Rajesh Singh and others seeking to quash an FIR registered against them under Section 66A of the Information Technology Act, which was declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court. The state conceded that the FIR could not be registered under the invalid section. Noting repeated instances of FIRs still being registered under the unconstitutional section despite Supreme Court orders, the court quashed the FIR and subsequent proceedings against the petitioners in this case. The court also directed circulation of the Supreme Court judgment invalidating Section 66A to address continued non-compliance with the ruling.

Rti kergov-rti-fb-131016-appln

Copying from the Central Information Commission, the Kerala State Information Commission conducted a two day seminar on RTI at Thiruvananthapuram on 11th and 12th October 2013. The Governor was supposed to inaugurate the function. Well aware of how these 'fraud' shows are organised and how the unsuspecting chief guest is made to express inanities fed by the organisers I sent a mail to the Governor on 9 Oct 2013 highlighting some important issues in the matter of implementation of the law in the State. These were the same ones I had handed over to the CIC, KSIC in Jan 2007! But as expected this was not brought to the notice of the Governor and he ended up making a fool of himself by talking only on the misuse of the Act as fed to him by the information commissioners though the fact is that it is only the information commissioners who can misuse the Act. This was also communicated to him through another mail which also was not brought to his notice. So this feedback was sent on 16 Oct 2013 along with an application under the RTI Act! The replies received both from the Public Information Officer and the First Appellate Authority at the Rajbhavan indicates that even in this office of the 1st public servant in the State the work ethics and quality are a far cry from what is expected of such an office!

Anoopgarh K.V.Sah Samiti vs. ACIT, Sriganganagar

suresh ojha

The document is a court order from the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal regarding an application for rectification of a previous order. The key details are: - The assessee (applicant) sought rectification of a previous Tribunal order regarding income tax assessment for the year 1995-96. - Specifically, the assessee argued that the previous order did not address an additional legal ground raised regarding excessive penalties levied. - The Tribunal partially allowed the application, recalling the previous order only to address the unadjudicated legal ground on penalties. It rejected attempts to re-write other aspects of the order. In summary, the Tribunal granted a partial rectification to address a specific legal issue

8284 of 2019 gauhati hc

This document is an order from the Gauhati High Court regarding a petition filed by Rahima Khatun challenging an ex-parte order from the Foreigners Tribunal declaring her an illegal migrant. The High Court remanded the matter back to the Foreigners Tribunal for reconsideration of Rahima Khatun's citizenship status, after hearing from her. It also directed Rahima Khatun to appear before the Superintendent of Police within 15 days to provide information and furnish a bail bond, and not leave the district without permission. The records were then remitted back to the Foreigners Tribunal for further proceedings.

Similar to Rti dated 06.10.2018 against SC (20)

Final status of PMOPG/E/2018/0480386 dated 09.10.2018

RTI dated 7.12.22 against suppression of Gang Rape matter.pdf

Brinda karat and anr. v. state and anr. (defects cleared)

Second appeal under RTI Act 2005 against Department of legal affairs dated 3....

Madras hc anti caa cases quashed

Saathik ali v state

Madras hc jan 21 order

Justice

Second Appeal dated 21.04.2017 before CIC New Delhi against Non-disclosure of...

Written submission for hearing D.NO.183721

Written Submission for Hearing D.NO.119689

First Appeal dated 16.03.2018 against CIC

Writ Petition Criminal diary no. 18546 of 2022 Part-II .pdf

Online Complaint against MOLAJ dated 16.08.2016

Application for Written Arguments for the date of hearing on 31.10.2022 in An...

Most important judgement for filing of form GST TRAN-1

Rajesh singh v state of up

Rti kergov-rti-fb-131016-appln

Anoopgarh K.V.Sah Samiti vs. ACIT, Sriganganagar

8284 of 2019 gauhati hc

More from Om Prakash Poddar

Reply to Election Commission Delhi in NGS5322435639 dated 25.11.2022.pdf

ERO Ms. Sunita Raj mobile no. 9650058340 59-Vishwas Nagar Constituency Sahadra district at East Delhi has admitted this fact that she has sent her man for making a fake voters under the legal guardianship of Complainant on 24.11.2022 at Shelter Home DUSIB Code No.214 near Anand Vihar ISBT Delhi. Hence, your BLO will disclose the name and address of person for whom he wanted to make fake Voter ID with ulterior motives. 112 call has been made against your fraud BLO dated 24.11.2022 with unique reference no. 6161038, PCR Petrol Vehicle ROMO9A mobile no. 7428002509 at 19.32.34pm. Anand Vihar policeman mobile number is 8595888677. Police had taken him to the police station. Hence police has recorded his name and address and motives behind it. Inquiry officer Balveer Singh mobile no. 9654963400 of Patpatganj Industrial Area Police Station near Anand Vihar ISBT Delhi will provide you the name and address of person who had come to make a fake voters under the legal guardianship of Complainant. Your fraud BLO did not disclose his identity before complainant.

Complaint dated 27.11.2022 to Commissioner of Polic Delhi.pdf

TAKE the cognizance of obvious links between Ms. Sunita Raj, BLO Anand Vihar and Mr. Manish Raj with this International Sex Racket and direct to concern SHO to register an F.I.R against the accused under relevant sections of IPC. 112 call dated 24.11.2022 at 19.32.34pm with unique reference no. 6161038 and subsequent Complaint dated 25.11.2022 to the Commissioner of Police Delhi dated 25.11.2022 discloses links with Mr. Manish Raj son of Chief Minister of Jharkhand in this International Sex Racket

Letter dated 27.11.2022 to CJI SC.pdf

Suppression of crucial records in Office Report dated 26.11.2022 in W.P. (Criminal) Diary No. 18546/2022 listed for hearing on 28.11.2022 before Chamber Judge HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA, Court No.15 CL.NO.1748 may lead to dismissal of petition. Registry has only recorded the records to defend its heinous work in the Office Report dated 26.11.2022 hiding all the factual crucial records filed by the petitioner even after his reminder though e-filed letter dated 22.11.2022 addressed to Branch Officer and Assistant Registrar Section X

Office Report dated 26.11.2022 in International Sex Racket matter Writ Petit...

Office Report dated 28.11.2022 in International Sex Racket matter Writ Petit...

The document is an office report from the Supreme Court of India regarding a writ petition filed by Om Prakash against the Union of India and others. The court had previously given the petitioner four weeks to cure any defects in the petition, but the petitioner has failed to file an application for condonation of delay in filing the writ petition within that timeframe. As there are still defects, the registrar has not yet interacted with the petitioner-in-person, so the matter is listed before the court for further directions.

Complaint dated 26.11.22 against Election Officer Katihar Bihar.pdf

a fake voter identity card has been created by BLO Part-220, Ward No.03, 64-Kadwa Constituency Katihar Bihar vide EPIC No. TYGO395244 against the Complainant. Complainant has figured out malpractices of BLO and submitted requisite form before BLO Gopal Malik mobile no. 9507949474 dated 17.12.2021 for deletion of his name from the voter list to suppress the practice of multiple voter identity cards across the Country.

Complaint dated 25.11.22 against Election Officer Sahadra Delhi.pdf

Letter dated 24.11.2022 to CJI.pdf

Letter dated 23.11.2022 to CJI.pdf

Letter dated 22.11.2022 to Branch Officer Section 10 at Supreme Court of Ind...

Additional e-Filed Petition dated 25.06.2022 on Anti-Prostitution before Sup...

Additional e-Filed Petition dated 25.06.2022 on Anti-Prostitution before Sup...

Additional e-Filed Petition dated 07.06.2022 on Anti-Prostitution before Sup...

This document contains information from the Supreme Court of India case management system. It lists details of a writ petition filed by Om Prakash such as the case type, number, year and presiding bench. It also includes a table with 10 uploaded PDF documents related to the petition, interlocutory applications and memos of appearance. General information about the court such as jurisdiction, officers, rules, and procedures is also presented.

E-Filed Petition dated 07.06.2022 on Anti-Prostitution before Supreme Court ...

Complaint dated 21.11.2022 against Bihar and Delhi police to NHRC.pdf

The National Human Rights Commission has received a complaint from Om Prakash regarding the kidnapping and abduction of his family members and minor daughters since 2011. The complaint details that neither the Delhi Police nor Bihar Police have registered an FIR regarding this incident. The complaint further states that the police complaint and post-mortem report of Om Prakash's deceased mother, who died in 2017, are still pending with the Palam Village Police Station in New Delhi. Om Prakash alleges that five individuals, including two advocates, can provide information to rescue his minor daughters and has requested that an FIR be registered against these five people.

E-filed status dated 15.11.22 before Supreme Court of India.pdf

Complaint aginst Delhi Police to NHRC New Delhi dated 20.11.22.pdf

ABDUCTION/RAPE by Police Surender Narayan Poddar, Rajput advocate of Purnea Bihar, Advocate Gopal Prasad and his wife Veena Kumari Advocate Sunil Ojha is key person who will reveal all records of this sex racket to rescue my minor daughters. Hence, register F.I.R against these five people to interrogate in this matter. Register an F.I.R and interrogate Shri Surender Narayan Poddar Assitant Manager Marketing Division IOCL Barauni Refinery Begusarai Bihar, my advocate Shri Sunil Ojha in HMA-678/2010 case at Dwarka Court at New Delhi, my wife Rina Kumari’s advocate Shri Gopal Prasad and his wife Veena Kumari in 9P/2010 case at Begusarai Court Bihar and Rajput advocate of Purnea Bihar in HMA-678/2010 case Goshwara No. 83)H at Dwarka Court at New Delhi.

Complaint aginst Kadwa Katihar Bihar Police to SHRC Bihar dated 20.11.22.pdf

ABDUCTION/RAPE by Police case. Surender Narayan Poddar, Rajput advocate of Purnea Bihar, Advocate Gopal Prasad and his wife Veena Kumari Advocate Sunil Ojha is key person who will reveal all records of this sex racket to rescue my minor daughters. Hence, register F.I.R against these five people to interrogate in this matter. Register an F.I.R and interrogate Shri Surender Narayan Poddar Assitant Manager Marketing Division IOCL Barauni Refinery Begusarai Bihar, my advocate Shri Sunil Ojha in HMA-678/2010 case at Dwarka Court at New Delhi, my wife Rina Kumari’s advocate Shri Gopal Prasad and his wife Veena Kumari in 9P/2010 case at Begusarai Court Bihar and Rajput advocate of Purnea Bihar in HMA-678/2010 case Goshwara No. 83)H at Dwarka Court at New Delhi.

Writ Petition Criminal Diary Number 18546 of 2022 Part-I .pdf

International Sex Racket and Anti-Prostitution Petition before Supreme Court of India. These five are key people and will reveal all records in this sex racket to rescue my minor daughters. Register F.I.R and interrogate Shri Surender Narayan Poddar Assitant Manager Marketing Division IOCL Barauni Refinery Begusarai Bihar, my advocate Shri Sunil Ojha in HMA-678/2010 case at Dwarka Court New Delhi, my wife Rina Kumari’s advocate Shri Gopal Prasad and his wife Veena Kumari in 9P/2010 case at Begusarai Court Bihar and Rajput advocate of Purnea Bihar in HMA-678/2010 case Goshwara No. 83)H at Dwarka Court New Delhi.

NHRC cases-2.pdf