British High court rejected the demand and ordered CBI to pay over a crore to Ravi Shankaran.

Friends, this landmark judgement was delivered by division
bench

 of  British High court when CBI was seeking extradition of Ravi Shankaran as the extradition  was earlier signed by Britsh home secretary . Here division bench of British High court not only criticized the slow pace and irksome process of Indian courts but rejected the demand and ordered to apex investigating agency of India to pay above a crore to Ravi Shankaran against the legal cost incurred by him .Court quoted that case was filed in June 2006 but trial still not commenced by the court . According to Hon’ble British High court no one may be allowed to infringe the human rights of any individual. Undoubtedly the order of British High court is praiseworthy and exemplary and and consequently slammed the cumbersome process of Indian courts . Here court itself abuse its process    because of tyranny of judicial members.                             Here whistle blowers are falsely prosecuted in various court cases.Case Status – Allahabad

Pending
Writ
– A / 20121 / 2006 [Mirzapur]
Petitioner:
RAJENDRA
PRATAP SINGH
Respondent:
STATE
OF U.P. AND OTHERS
Counsel
(Pet.):
P.C.
CHAUHAN
Counsel
(Res.):
C.S.C.
Category:
Service-Writ
Petitions Relating To Secondary Education (non Teaching Staff) (single
Bench)-Salary And Allowances
Date
of Filing:
10/04/2006
Last
Listed on:
06/12/2007
in Court No. 25
Next
Listing Date (Likely):
06/05/2014

Pasted from <http://yogimpsingh.blogspot.in/2014/03/an-appeal-submitted-against-denial-of.html> 

9 comments on British High court rejected the demand and ordered CBI to pay over a crore to Ravi Shankaran.

  1. Lodge a Grievance Lodge Reminder/Clarification View Status Change Password Forgot Password

    Grievance Status

    Print || Logout

    Status as on 14 Apr 2014

    Registration Number : GOVUP/E/2014/00728 Name Of Complainant : Yogi M P Singh Date of Receipt : 14 Apr 2014 Received by : Government of Uttar Pradesh Officer name : Shri R.N. Mourya Officer Designation : Under Secretary (PG) Contact Address : Chief Minister Secretariat U.P. Secretariat, Lucknow226001 Contact Number : 05222215137 Grievance Description : There is need of two control rate ration shop in the village panchayat Nibigaharwar Block-Chhanbey District-Mirzapur With due respect your applicant wants to draw kind attention of the Hon'ble Sir to the following submissions as follows. 1- It is submitted before the Hon'ble Sir that the population of the aforesaid village panchayat is more than five thousand and need two control rate ration shop . 2- It is submitted before the Hon'ble Sir that a person known Ghanshyam is running this control rate shop since 25 years and Now known as Binala because of wealth amassed during this period. 3- It is submitted before the Hon'ble Sir that there is too much unemployment in the village and earlier a youth has been died because of starvation so two control rate shop will ensure employment to atleast one youth of the village and man became Binala will not become more rich. There are so many complaints against this allottee of control rate shop of Government so in the public interest, two cotrol rate shop is must in this Most populous village of Block-Chhanbey District-Mirzapur. This is humble request of your applicant to you Hon'ble Sir to consider my submitted grievance seriously in the interest of poor and downtrodden. For this your applicant shall ever pray you Hon'ble Sir. Yours sincerely Yogi M. P. Singh Mohalla- Surekapuram, Jabalpur Road, District- Mirzapur State-Uttar Pradesh , India Current Status : RECEIVED THE GRIEVANCE

    * Recommended Browsers * 1. Microsoft Internet Explorer 7.0 or

    DARPG Website || Contact Us || National Portal of India || Disclaimer ©2009 Designed, Developed and hosted by National Informatics Centre

    Brought to you by Department of Administra

  2. Case Status – Allahabad

    Writ – A / 20121 / 2006 [Mirzapur]

    RAJENDRA PRATAP SINGH

    STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS

    P.C. CHAUHAN

    C.S.C.

    Service-Writ Petitions Relating To Secondary Education (non Teaching Staff) (single Bench)-Salary And Allowances

    10/04/2006

    06/12/2007 in Court No. 25

    06/05/2014

    This is not an authentic/certified copy of the information regarding status of a case. Authentic/certified information may be obtained under Chapter VIII Rule 30 of Allahabad High Court Rules. Mistake, if any, may be brought to the notice of OSD (Computer).

  3. Case was listed on 06/12/2007 in Court No. 25
    Next Listing Date (Likely):

    06/05/2014
    This shows that wheel of justice delivery system is completely jammed and having zero speed. This is signal of failed democracy and urgent need of overhauling and people are crying for it but accountable functionaries are so indulged in deep rooted corruption that they don't want to come out from this hell like worm of drainage never wants to come out from it.

  4. Entire world knows that what is going on in the Indian judiciary. Think about the gravity of situation that high court at Allahabad don't provide sought information shows that accountable function don't advocate transparency in its function. They don't want that wrongdoings of judiciary may not come in public domain.

  5. LONDON: The piling number of pending cases in the Indian judiciary is legendary, estimates saying it would take 320 years to clear the backlog of 31.28 million cases pending in various courts across the country.And it is this "sluggish pace" that has come in for severe criticism by the British high court in the recent naval war room leak case.The Court this week squashed the extradition order of Ravi Shankaran signed earlier by UK's home secretary.The two-member bench comprising Lord Brian Leveson and Justice Blake sitting in the Queen's Bench Division in London ruled: "Prima Facie there is no case against Ravi Shankaran".

    The High Court pulled up the CBI saying that an Indian court had not commenced the trial till date, though the case was filed in June 2006.The Court rejected the demand and ordered the CBI to pay over a crore to Shankaran against the legal costs incurred by him.According to the judgment released here on Friday, the judges laid out the facts of the proceedings, which commenced in 2010.To date, the proceedings have lasted three years: the district judge did not put the blame for such delay on the appellant (Shankaran). In the meantime, it is not in dispute that proceedings in India have also moved at what can only be described as a sluggish pace," the order reads.It added: "It took around six years (from initial arrest in April 2006 until an appellate decision of the Indian courts dated 11 May 2012) for the Indian defendants to secure bail. As at that date, the documentary basis of the case against them had still not been disclosed," it adds."Irrespective of the identity of the requesting state, for as long as any defendant to the extradition process is within this jurisdiction, he or she is entitled to rely on the European Convention of Human Rights (ECHR). If extradition would breach the Appellant's human rights, then he must not be extradited," the ruling points out.The UK court had earlier said that it seemed like India no longer felt there was credible and admissible evidence against the accused.

  6. HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
    Case Status – Allahabad

    Pending
    Writ – A / 20121 / 2006 [Mirzapur]

    Petitioner: RAJENDRA PRATAP SINGH
    Respondent: STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS
    Counsel (Pet.): P.C. CHAUHAN
    Counsel (Res.): C.S.C.
    Category: Service-Writ Petitions Relating To Secondary Education (non Teaching Staff) (single Bench)-Salary And Allowances
    Date of Filing: 10/04/2006
    Last Listed on: 06/12/2007 in Court No. 25
    Next Listing Date (Likely): 14/08/2015
    This is not an authentic/certified copy of the information regarding status of a case. Authentic/certified information may be obtained under Chapter VIII Rule 30 of Allahabad High Court Rules. Mistake, if any, may be brought to the notice of OSD (Computer).

  7. HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
    Case Status – Allahabad

    Pending
    Writ – A / 20121 / 2006 [Mirzapur]

    Petitioner: RAJENDRA PRATAP SINGH
    Respondent: STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS
    Counsel (Pet.): P.C. CHAUHAN
    Counsel (Res.): C.S.C.
    Category: Service-Writ Petitions Relating To Secondary Education (non Teaching Staff) (single Bench)-Salary And Allowances
    Date of Filing: 10/04/2006
    Last Listed on: 06/12/2007 in Court No. 25
    Next Listing Date (Likely): 31/08/2015
    This is not an authentic/certified copy of the information regarding status of a case. Authentic/certified information may be obtained under Chapter VIII Rule 30 of Allahabad High Court Rules. Mistake, if any, may be brought to the notice of OSD (Computer).

  8. HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
    Case Status – Allahabad

    Pending
    Writ – A / 20121 / 2006 [Mirzapur]

    Petitioner: RAJENDRA PRATAP SINGH
    Respondent: STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS
    Counsel (Pet.): P.C. CHAUHAN
    Counsel (Res.): C.S.C.
    Category: Service-Writ Petitions Relating To Secondary Education (non Teaching Staff) (single Bench)-Salary And Allowances
    Date of Filing: 10/04/2006
    Last Listed on: 06/12/2007 in Court No. 25
    Next Listing Date (Likely): 30/09/2015
    This is not an authentic/certified copy of the information regarding status of a case. Authentic/certified information may be obtained under Chapter VIII Rule 30 of Allahabad High Court Rules. Mistake, if any, may be brought to the notice of OSD (Computer).

  9. HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
    Case Status – Allahabad

    Pending
    Writ – A / 20121 / 2006 [Mirzapur]

    Petitioner: RAJENDRA PRATAP SINGH
    Respondent: STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS
    Counsel (Pet.): P.C. CHAUHAN
    Counsel (Res.): C.S.C.
    Category: Service-Writ Petitions Relating To Secondary Education (non Teaching Staff) (single Bench)-Salary And Allowances
    Date of Filing: 10/04/2006
    Last Listed on: 06/12/2007 in Court No. 25
    Next Listing Date (Likely): There is no further order for listing!
    This is not an authentic/certified copy of the information regarding status of a case. Authentic/certified information may be obtained under Chapter VIII Rule 30 of Allahabad High Court Rules. Mistake, if any, may be brought to the notice of OSD (Computer).

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: