No sufficient law is available for my justice

VISION FOR ALL

• 270 Posts
• 28 Comments

In India,many laws are reverse in nature like Sedition Law (Rajdroha) under section 124 A of IPC.I am in the favour,this law must be confined,not removed. This law must be confined to the extent of Internal and External Security.There should be no any provision like assaulting of national emblem and Indian Constitution etc.
If this law is used to stop the expression of a person.Why this can’t be u
sed against those who stop the expression of a person?Why there can’t be sedition law against principal who tries to stop my expression by refusing to allot Humanities due to an aricle and trapping me with a boy who was helpful for my project and research?In this condition,why sedition law can’t be used?
If a person commits rape or any other offence,punished by the provided sections.If a person traps a person falsely in rape or any other offence,why the conspirator who traps innocent is not punished like rape or such offence in which a person is trapped by the conspirator?Why there is no such provision in law?Why this is not written in all sections that if a person is trapped falsely by the conspirator,the conspirator will be awarded punishment of same which is awarded for an offender of the same offence?
This is the fundamental of law that thousands and thousands of criminals may pass unpunished but not a single innocent should be punished.In this view,the person who traps an innocent must be punished more than offender of the same offence.But such conspirator is even not punished.A person has to fight contempt case to punish such conspirator who traps an innocent forcely.
So why principal should not be punished for unnatural offence under section 377 as he trapped me in the same offence forcely?

People who have helped me in my case
1.Editor,Hindustan,Muzaffarpur:-He said principal to keep me again in school but principal refused by saying that there is complaint of that mother against me.So he is an important evidence of my case.
2.Public Prosecutor,Civil Court of a district(Information is not provided about district due to security):- He has legally helped me a lot free of charge.

People who have assured help in my case
1.IG of an investigation agency(Information is not provided about investigation agency due to security):He has said to meet him.He has also written a letter to a SP to meet him in place of him if i want.
2.Lawyer of Patna High Court:-He has said that he will help to file case in the High Court.
I am grateful to these all.
They have followed humanity .

Judge can be prosecuted under contempt case whether he can be chairperson of Bihar Human Rights Commission and former chief justice of the High Court.
We are an intellectual person but we are going with prejudices.You know,there is no any other boy who has presented himself as an eye-witness and the boy himself said nothing such.This is totally clear by the documents prepared against me by the pri
ncipal.Moreover,no one can be trapped in such case without medical test under section 164 of CrPC which is also included under Indian Evidence Act and guidelines of National Human Rights Commission.In spite of this,how i was trapped?This proves only conspiracy and prejudices. But no one wants to go through facts and legal provision.Everyone has only prejudice to see the matter.Even the judge of Bihar Human Rights Commission,who was the chief justice of High Court,went through prejudices and didn’t consider facts which i have stated before you above.What do you think now?

LAW IS NOT FUTURISTIC AND ONLY DEALS WITH FAULTS
FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT IS VERY CONFINED!No more Place Of Individual Right..Only the place for right humiliated for major people…
There is no more provision in our constitution(in any constitution of the world) to deal with cases like of my case.
This is not possible to insert article in my matter.
As far as expulsion is considered,on my behalf,i can o
nly say that this is humiliation of right to education but only in the sense of right to life -article 21 of Indian Constitution.No more provision is available.
For the trapping by principal,i will have to again go under right to life-article 21 because right to life explains about right to live with human dignity and freedom from torturing.
For trapping me with the boy without going through procedure established by law(without evidence),i can go through right to privacy-which is also under right to life.I will have to present empathetic logics to categorize this thing under right to privacy.I will surely say that there is no right for other person to interfer in friendship between 2 personnel without any evidence.So this is humiliation of right to privacy.
For refusing to allot humanities due to a philosophical article.I will have to go only with humiliation of right to freedom of expression under article 19(1)(a).But this is not only the humiliation of freedom of expression but this is also the humiliation of freedom of selecting occupation because opting Humanities is related to select career in this field.But under article 19(1)(g) ,right to freedom of selecting occupation only deals with humiliation of selecting occupation in present not in future.But this may be considered under this article because this would be resulted in the humiliation of freedom of selecting occupation in future ultimately.Even this is the humiliation of right to equality of opportunity but right to equality of opportunity only deals with in the matter of employment or appointment.There is no seizure of my employment or appointment forcely but refusing to allot humanities by principal is the seizure of equal opportunity to grow up to get career in future.But the equality of opportunity only deals with employment and appointment.
Principal imposed the condition of expulsion if i would be in tension.I will have to satisfy myself only going through section available for torturing and i can use article 21 of right to life which explains about freedom from torturing.But is this only torturing or something more?By saying such,principal behaved with me as slave and principal humiliated my equal opportunity to grow up because no other was imposed such condition.Only i was imposed.But article for slavery and equal opportunity don’t explain such.
Principal said without any evidence and due to prejudice that he would expell me if i would talk with the boy.I will have to satisfy myself only going through section available
for torturing and i can use article 21 of right to life which explains about freedom from torturing.But is this only torturing or something more?Principal(even his mother and any) has no right to interfer in friendship between 2 personnel without evidence.So this is humiliation of right to privacy.
The boy was so helpful for my project.In spite of this,principal trapped me without evidence.He was helpful for my expression.But right to freedom of expression only says about the humiliation of expression expressed by a person.He was not an article,which can be expressed.But helpful for my project.How this will be categorized under humiliation of right to freedom of expression?
Principal trapped me after complaining against him.So i protested against principal.But right to protest under article 19(1)(b) only deals with protesting peacefully in gathering.Not explains personal protest.I complained due to personal problems.So this should be considered under right against exploitation.But right against exploitation only deals with child labour,human trafficing etc and not such matter like suppression of someone by a person due to personal interest or prejudices.
Article 15(1) can help me because i was being trapped on the ground of caste also and article 15(1) bars descrimination on ground of such feelings.

”Justice delay,justice decline.”
This is fundamental of justice.
”Thousands and thousands of criminals may passed unpunished but not a single innocent should be punished.”
This is fundamental of law.
There is legal provision like ”Benefit Of Doubt” to not punish an innocent if a person is being doubted but there is no strong evidence.
In my case,nothing was considered by the Human Right
s Commission.
If a judge can’t follow such things,why such things are written in law.
More than one year has passed and there is no justice for me.Justice delay,justice decline-in this view,the justice has been murdered.But i have stopped to think whether i will get justice in at least declined form or not.
In my case,there is no need of benefit of doubt.There are a lot of evidences in my favour and legal provisions to prove me right.
Under section 164 of CrPC,Under Indian Evidence Act and under guidelines of National Human Rights Commission,there should be all required forensic test to prove whether rape is committed or not.
But the judge of even Bihar Human Rights Commission didn’t consider forensic(medical) test.The judge himself humiliated legal provisions.

I must have CBI Enquiry or power to investigate.
In my case,many officers,even judge are involved to protect the principal of JNV Samastipur and this thing is ultimately resulted in kept me trapping but i want freedom from that objection.Even the High Court will be prejudiced only by hearing such matter against me and neglecting involvement of many officers,even judge in my case.So i am fearful t
hat High Court will not accept my petition.One more thing is that i am working for a new philosophy which can have power to challenge any system of any country.The ideology is new,so everyone is opponent.The judge of Human Rights Commission was neglecting me due to this ideology also.
There are many reasons to have CBI enquiry.
1.The judge closed my case prejudicially and baselessly.
2.Principal has prepared fake documents against me addressed to DM and SDM and some district level officers have helped principal to hide his conspiracy.DM may be involved,i don’t know.But officers lower than DM like the officer on special duty of Gila Gopniya Prasakha and the officer incharge of district public grievance cell are totally involved and i have evidences.
3.Many NVS officers have protected principal like AK Tiwari,AC,NVS,Patna has submitted report what principal said,Deputy Commissioner was reported twice by the principal to sign on my father’s application for TC, GS Chandra,AC,NVS,Patna and SK Gurg,AC,NVS,Headquarter refused to say principal why principal was saying to expell by saying that i have complained against principal and said him corrupt,DC Verma,AC,NVS,Headquarter and Madanpal Singh,AC,NVS,Patna have refused to provide information twice,S.Chandrasekaran,AC,NVS,Headquarter who said twice that no further action will be taken as the enquiry report is very clear.But no my favour is considered in the enquiry ok AK Tiwari.
4.Union HRD ministry only forwaded the issue to NVS after the order of the NHRC and didn’t take any action at its level.
5.Principal has badly utilized a boy,a widowed mother and some teachers against me.
6.Principal has cheated media in very wrong manner.

principal[JNV SAMASTIPUR] ki farjiwara aur gundagardi dekhiye…………
1.The complaint written in the name of that child is written by the brother of him and his sign is not present.Principal has signed on 20.9.2011-2 days before- but the complaint is done as the enclosure of PK Acharya on 22.9.2011.
2.There is no sign of the principal in complaint done to the principal by t
he mother of the boy of dated:-22.8.2011.
3.The complaint done by the mother of the boy to the District Magistrate,Samastipur is of dated:-23.9.2011 but the complainant has signed on 23.8.2011-one month before.The complaint is sealed and application No. is given to this complaint on 26.9.2011 but the complaint is sealed and application No. is given on the day of complaining.So this must had to be sealed and application No had to be given on 23.9.2011.
4.The complaint done by the mother of the boy to the Sub-Divisional Magistrate,Dalsingsarai,Samastipur, is of 23.9.2011. In the complaint to Sub-Divisional Magistrate,no date,case no and seal is present.The complaint is signed by the applicant on 23.9.2011 but signed by an official on dated:-21.9.2011-two days before.
5.The complaint of Ghan Shyam[GS] Chaudhary is of dated:-24.8.2011.On the date of my absconding.The complaint was done in 23.8.2011 and this is made 24.8.2011 by any other.
6.The complaint of PK Acharya is of 22.9.2011 but no sign of principal is present in the complaint.
Overall,These faults prove that the all complaints are fake,prepared artificially in back date.This point may be noted also that the mostly complaints are of Sept 2011-after complaining against principal in August 2011 and after of 6 months as all matters are of till March 2011.Thirdly,this point may be noted as the commission said that if this is assumed that i was expelled then this would appear in the nature of disciplinary measure that i was expelled on 14 Sept 2011[which i have written in my complaint of dated:-19.12.2011 done to the BHRC] but mostly complaints are of after 14 Sept.
This point may be noted also that the complaint of GS Chaudhary is signed by the principal on 24.8.2011 but he was not present in school on 24.8.2011.