The External Affairs Ministry, Government of India, Respondent in C.W.No.4972/97 (C.M.9144/97) was directed by High Court of Delhi, an order of mandamus to dispose of the representation submitted by petitioner within two months of the date of the Judgment. The directives contained in the judgment of Delhi High Court was dated 20-11-1997. In total negation of such a specific order of the Delhi High Court, the External Affairs Ministry, despite the lapse of 16 years of date of the judgment, demonstrates a blatant disrespect to the law of the country.
It has to be noted, that a mandamus is an extraordinary writ commanding an official to perform a ministerial act that the law recognizes as an absolute duty and not a matter for the official's discretion. A mandamus is used only when all other judicial remedies fail. The legal instruments that a society or government develops in order to deal effectively with crime and meaningful relief to victims of their circumstances. When these legal principles are ignored it would only erode the public faith and confidence in the judicial system.
Under such a very compelling circumstance, an attempt is being made to publish the relevant records of the case and communications with the MEA in different stages.
The petitioner was an established businessman and investor engaged in the business of ‘Trading and General Contracting’ in Abu Dhabi, UAE. He was trapped in a fabricated police case quote "Using force against Government employee and assault" unquote. He was brutally tortured and imprisoned illegally for over a year. The Judges of both the Trial Court and the Apex Court of Abu Dhabi found that the petitioner was innocent; ‘a martyr’.
The Hon’ble Judges instructed the authorities to release the victim immediately. The case was wholly false, baseless and that it was fabricated by the police for personal gain. Court observed the policeman's disclaim from his complaint only magnified his notoriety. It further reiterated the condemnation of prosecutor. The Court, therefore, ordered to restore the victim’s dignity, and compensate him for all his losses while pronouncing this ‘historic Judgment'.
Despite both the Courts declaring him to be innocent and directing the authorities to compensate the businessman for all his losses and restore his dignity, the Abu Dhabi authorities resorted retaliatory tactics to save their faces. Injustice has again been committed against the petitioner, the victim was re-victimized over and over again in Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates and later he was deported back to India. (View Features)
After reaching India, the petitioner has made every effort to uphold his dignity and his rights. He has made representations to the Union Government of India asking them to grant him leave to institute legal proceedings against the state of UAE. In October 1996 a writ petition was filed by petitioner before the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India. The facts enumerated therein would clearly establish the callous attitude of the authorities in UAE.
The Supreme Court of India took cognizance of the case and suggested the Delhi High Court deal with it. The very fact that the Supreme Court enabled us to withdraw the petition and file it under Article 226 of the Constitution in the High Court of Delhi, shows that the Hon’ble Supreme Court found merit in the case.
The petitioner has thereafter moved the Delhi High Court. The Hon'ble High Court of Delhi, after hearing the Senior Counsel, Mr. K. Sukumaran, was pleased to issue a mandamus to the Government, the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) to dispose off the petitioner's case within two months from the date of Order (20-11-1997). The deadline set by the High court is long past.
.
The Judgment of Delhi High Court
The directives contained in the judgment of Delhi High Court dated 20-11-1997 of Justice Arun Kumar, the Hon'ble High Court of New Delhi (Appellate Civil Jurisdiction), C.W.No.4972/97 (C.M.9144/97) read as follows:-
The only grievance of the petitioner is that his representation dated 26th December, 1996 has still not been disposed of respondents. ...The said respondents are directed to dispose of the said representation of the petitioner within two months from today. The petition stands disposed of. (The External Affairs Ministry was, in fact, (quoted as) Respondent No.2 in the case).
Although the High Court of Delhi ordered the External Affairs Ministry, vide its judgment dated judgment dated 20-11-1997 to dispose of the representation of the petitioner dated 26th Dec, 1996 within two months of the date of judgment, even as on date, the directives in the said judgment have not been acted upon.
The directives of the Hon'ble High Court of New Delhi, followed by repeated efforts by petitioner through higher officials of the country have also been kicked out by the Ministry of External Affairs, India. In a recent letter to the MEA enquiring the status of the case under the Right to Information Act, the MEA has sent an evasive reply that they do not have any records of the case with them. The External Affairs Ministry, Government of India, without caring to obey the judicial order, have shirked or willfully evaded the entire responsibility that would amount to contempt of Court and calls for other appropriate legal action against the Ministry (MEA).
Copies of the records
Under such a very compelling circumstance, an attempt is being made to publish the relevant records of the case and communications with the MEA in different stages. Copies of the records of the case are appended hereto for your kind perusal.
1. Letter 26-11-2012 from the Embassy of India - No papers of the case could be traced by the Embassy of India, Abu Dhabi
2. Letter 26-11-2012 from the External Affairs Ministry - No papers of the case could be traced by the Ministry of External Affairs
3. Reply under RTI Act Letter No. RTI/551/763/2012 /July 11, 2012 - To the Ministry of External Affairs, New Delhi.
Copies of letters from the Ministry of External Affairs, Government of India, National Human Rights Commission (N.H.R.C), Prime Minister’s Office, The Ambassador of India, United Arab Emirates, other institutions and personalities for reference. (Resources)
Demanding Justice, Truth and Court-ordered reparations
Respect Judicial decisions and uphold the rule of law.Mindful, in particular, that a judgment debt is hanging over the Abu Dhabi Emirate, United Arab Emirates. The judgment is binding and enforceable by the court of Abu Dhabi from where the ruling came from. It should also be kept in mind that successor governments remain bound by the acts incurred by the predecessor governments. The Judgment debt of Abu Dhabi, can be eliminated or satisfied by the enforcement of judgments and legal remedies...Investors
Is the External Affairs Ministry of India above the Law?
The External Affairs Ministry, Government of India, was directed by High Court of Delhi to settle the matters submitted by petitioner within two months of the date of the Judgment. The directives contained in the judgment of Delhi High Court, commanding the officials to perform a ministerial act that the law recognizes as an absolute duty and not a matter for the official's discretion. In total negation of such a specific order of the Delhi High Court, the External Affairs Ministry of India, despite the lapse of 16 years of date of the judgment, demonstrates a blatant disrespect to the law of the country. The legal instruments that a nation or government develops in order to deal effectively with crime and meaningful relief to victims of their circumstances. When these legal principles are ignored it would only erode the public faith and confidence in the judicial system...‘Read Publications’
The ‘UAE Court Judgments’ are worth buying, in all respects
The UAE officials are committed to honour the content of the obligation to execute the Court Judgments now available for sale to general public. The execution of the Judgment, it is inferred, is only delayed but not denied. View the statements and documents in connection with the European Parliament resolution. A great potential and scope for investments in a Judgment, awarded by the highest Court of Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates...More Details
1
Read, Reflect, React:- Justice on trial – United Arab Emirates...Read
2
A Portfolio of UAE Judgments:- The sale price, it is only 35% of the original price!...Read
3
UAE Judgments are worth buying, in all respects:- The UAE officials are committed to honour the content of the obligation to execute the Court Judgments now available for sale to general public...Read
4
Judgment For Sale - FAQ:- Frequently Asked Questions in respect of selling Court awarded Judgments...Read
5
Judgment Marketplace:- Join us and explore our innovative approaches to secure Justice...Read
6
UAE Case Law:-The Case Law & Constitution of UAE...Read
7
International Responsibility:-States as Guardians of the Rights of Individuals...Read
8
Legal Remedies & Reparations:- :-Reparation has progressively been conceived as a 'Right' of victims...Read
9
Legal Research & Outsourcing:- A team of professionals who have vast knowledge and expertise in the Legal field...Read
10
Invest in a judgment recovery business:- This is one of our value added, superior marketing plans primarily to honour and support the rights of individuals...Read
Landmark Judgments in the history of Abu Dhabi (UAE) Jurisprudence – Now on sale!
There are diabolical debtors who hide Judicial decisions, commit fraud or other henious acts to avoid honoring obligations! Buy portfolios of UAE Judgments now on sale!...More Details
Learn about corrupt practices in UAE
The head of a business empire based in Abu Dhabi was attacked by a posse of policemen in civil dress at his office; robbed of cash and valuables to force him to withdraw a lawsuit against a property owner...More Details
'ABOUT JFS'
JFS, (Judgment For Sale) is a unique business strategy to satisfy legal judgments, to recover his or her rights from the debtors specified in a Judgment. As a lawful owner of a legal Judgement, the victim has the right to offer his Judgment for sale or to make efforts to legally enforce and recover his assets and the inherent rights of individuals to dignity... 'About JFS'
