Re: [Hum] [IAC] Arvind Kejriwal and party no longer with IAC movement

Dear Bali-ji

You have posed short queries which needs a long answer.

1) I am not against either Anna or Arvind so long as they are honest, patriotic. Unfortunately they are neither.

2) I am not against either Anna or Arvind (or even Sonia Gandhi) if they (who claim to represent India) are open, accessible, transparent and reply to questions or information requests CONCERNING THEM posed by any citizen of India. ( I am even prepared to pay them Rs.10 RTI application fee if they will give me information within 30 days without any evasion).

3) The background to the "5 people" goes something like this. I am not giving the exact dates as that will have to be fished out from our old mailing list archives.

a) CIC starts functioning from Nov 2005. In early 2006 and Late Prakash Kardaley (Master-ji) and I start having "public" differences of opinion on HumJanenge-Yahoo group mailing list (private position/friendship was something else) and we agreed that 2 swords (him/me) could not remain in same scabbard (HJ). I and some core people from HJ (including Ashish) form RTI_India Yahoo Group mailing list in Feb 2006 as an alternative point of view.

 b) On 12.April.2006 Aruna Roy  (NAC member) and Shekhar Singh (NCPRI Convenor)  applied in RTI to obtain a secret Cabinet report on increasing Narmada Dam's height. Prashant Bhushan was representing Medha Patkar and NBA (Narmada Bacho Andolan) in SC and they had already obtained a private copy of the report, but they desperately needed an official copy to file in SC within 3 days. It as arranged by Sonia that the report would be given from PMO (where it actually was) in 48 hours under Life and Liberty clause because Medha Patkar was on hunger strike. At the time Madhya Pradesh and Gujarat were both BJP ruled states and Congress badly wanted to fix/divide these states by this divisive report using the SC.

c) Shekhar Singh made one big mistake. He posted on HJ that they had applied to PMO for this information and he posted a copy of his RTI on HJ. Immediately several other activists (who knew the political game) got agitated by this, particularly Rahul Mangaonkar (from Gujarat) and somebody from MP whose name I don't recall offhand. They appealed to Masterji to get Aruna Roy to see sense.  But Congress compulsions dictated that the matter be handled in SC while Khare is still  CJI because the next Rajendra Babu was a "Tartar".  It was agreed by HJ group that Veeresh Malik would file a 3rd party intervention to PMO to block Aruna Roy's RTI. Unfortunately, for some reasons Veeresh couldn't draft or file it in time, so they approached me since I was based in Delhi. Somehow I got that 3rd party intervention lodged in PMO.  My sole ground was that Prithiviraj Chavan (one of the 3 members who wrote that report) has obtained information in confidence from us which was contained in that report - hence section 11 attracted. Certain other hugely damaging allegations (in language like only I or Babubhai Vaghela can make) were also made in my 3rd party intervention.

d) CPIO Kamal Dayani of PMO reading my intervention immediately decided not to touch it and forwarded (under intimation to me) the entire bundle of papers (their RTI and my 3rd party intervention) to the Ministry of Water Resources (Saifuddin Soz - very good pal of Wajahat) to deal with. Ministry of MoWR was also not inclined to give the information to Aruna.  So Aruna Roy immediately put in a Life and Liberty complaint to her pal Wajahat to list the matter since Medha "was about to die".

e) Within 1 hour my CIC sources tipped me off, and I sent a fairly stiff email to Wajahat clearly stating that I had given information in confidence to Prithviraj Chaavan for this report and hence I was a 3rd party opposing information disclosure (copy marked to CPIO MoWR). Wajahat lists matter for 19.April.2006 - bench of himself and Padma Balasubramanian. Aruna Roy gets to know of this and stiff/kadak Padma is replaced by M.M.Ansari.

f) Now see what happens on 19.April.I and Veeresh go there. The CPIO Mr Padmanabhan (a very upright officer) has refused to give the report. Outside the meeting hall a big argument was taking place, and Aruna Roy and Shekhar Singh who were there in person were screaming with CPIO that report had to be handed over in "National Interest" or he would be transferred to Kala Paani.  I am screaming I' m a 3rd party and I''ll screw you in OSA if you disclose it. Finally she threatened to call Sonia, some phone call was made which the PIO listened to and the report was handed over to them. They immediately took the report and scooted off.  Arvind Kejriwal (their "B" team who had just returned from a 2 month CIA sponsored training trip in Mexico (?)) was left behind to represent them. The hearing started, Habibullah and Ansari couldn't look anyone in the face, the hearing was  pure farce - CPIO-PMO says I have transferred it, CPIO (MoWR) says we faxed them the report  yesterday (a blatant lie), Arvind (who was then only Aruna Roy's chaprasi to carry her handbag and mobile when Nikhil Dey was not there ) says absolutely nothing except "we have got the report can it be confirmed in this order that it is the official copy".  I protest that if that is so PIO should be punished under Official Secrets Act for not following section 11 protocol. Ansari agrees with me but Habibullah over-rules him and say he will handle it.  It was agreed by them that Habibllah would draft the order.  The order is a total whitewashand package of lies  (Habibullah comes from a old Congressi family on his mother's side)  and can be read here
www.rti.india.gov.in/cic_decisions/Decision_19042006.pdf

e) From that day onwards I dedicated myself to exposing these corrupt foreign financed RTI HARAMIs.

4) The meeting (actually it was an encounter)  took place outside CIC in Feb 2007. The (sketchy) details and photos are at this link.
http://indiaagainstcorruption.net.in/origins-iac-campaign
also read this CIC decision
http://rti.india.gov.in/cic_decisions/WB-26032009-03.pdf

In the course of that meeting Veeresh Malik remarked that 5 such different RTI activists as different as the 5 fingers on 1 hand would never reassemble, to which I countered that WE (ie. Veeresh and myself) represented India against these Corrupt foreign financed " Hand" NGO f***ers like Shekhar Singh and Arvind.  (I didn't know then who Manish Sisodia was) and WE were "India Against Corruption".

5) Last month, Aruna Roy and I publicly discussed the 19.April.2006 incident at the CIC RTI Convention.  I accused her of being a privileged person who gets privileged information home delivered from under Sonia's unConstitutional petticoats.  She recalled the incident very well and did not contradict me.

6) In the meantime, we  are (and have always represented) India Against Corruption) a Federation of some leading RTI activists and groupings of India.  Our "office bearers" are listed here
http://indiaagainstcorruption.net.in/about-us
As a leading light in RTI firmament yourself,  you'll definitely know all the names & faces.

PS:  2 months after that 2006 hearing Aruna gifted a Magsaysay award to Arvind for his chaprasi-giri.
PPS:  2 (?) weeks  after that hearing "we" rogered Prasanth Bhushan in the Narmada matter in SC.

Sarbajit
National Convenor
"India Against Corruption" a Jan Andolan

On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 7:35 PM, Parbodh Bali <pcbali@rediffmail.com> wrote:

Respected Sarabjit,

Are you against IAC of Mr. Anna & Mr. Kejriwal? And who were those 5 people who on 10/2/2007 coined name IAC ? And what was need to coin IAC at that time ? What are your expectations for a genuine IAC ?

You are very genuine person. Just detail full story for the newcomers for their knowledge to better understand the issues.

I will be obliged.

PC Bali

From: Sarbajit Roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com>
Sent: Mon, 12 Nov 2012 18:11:33
To: hum@lists.riseup.net
Subject: [Hum] [IAC] Arvind Kejriwal and party no longer with IAC movement

Sir

I can say in all modesty that on 10.Feb.2007 I coined the phrase  "India Against Corruption". to describe 5 people (representing "India") ranged  against Arvind (personifying "Corruption"). I think subconsciously Arvind / Manish remembered that phrase and used it later on.

Long before that a legal body  in the name and style of India Against Corruption had filed a Petition/Application in your Allahabad High Court in early '70s, which latter got tagged with Raj Narain's Election Petition which was argued by Shanti Bhushanji for Raj  Narain.

This IAC organisation is associated with Hindustan RepublicanAssociation linked with ChandraShekhar Azad, Bhagat Singh etc and is

now run by one Dr Sanyal (originally from Kanpur)  who is the nephew (or maybe grand nephew) of Sachindranath Sanyal (HRA's founder) who was hanged in  Kakori Conspiracy Case in 1925. I believe the Society/Association is still functioning and has even fought an election or 2.  In fact  Arvind was going to launch his party first on 15.Aug, then on 2.Oct

 with IAC name, but in view of this little problem they had to twice postpone and now need a new name.

As the genius who coined the phrase India Against Corruption for this   modern DharmYuddh which stirred the nation, I have absolutely no intention of joining hands (or sharing any platform) with notoriously corrupt or massively foreign financed persons like Anna, Kiran Bedi, Medha Patkar or Arvnd Kejriwal etc.

At IAC we have our own A-team of indigenous corruption fighters, and there is no group better than ours when it actually comes to doing something against corruption. Some of their names are on the IAC  website.

Causal arm-chair Corruption Warriors may glorify pip-squeaks like Arvind and Anna as lions and compare them to Bhagat Singh and Azad, but there is a well known phrase "Let he who is without blame cast the first stone". Citizens can pose a few counter queries for IAC:-

A) Is it not true that for 3 years Mr Anna Hazare was a leashed poodle of Congress because of the Justice P.B.Sawant Comm of Inquiry's Report ?. Is it not interesting that a State Govt appoints a Task Force to  over-turn Justice Sawant's CoI Report indicting 4 Ministers and Mr. Hazare for rampant Corruption and maladministration.

B) Is it not unheard of that Mr Kejriwal's wife has been continuously posted in Delhi/NCR for 20(?) years, and for many years has been in the Serious Fraud Office which investigates the same corrupt people whom Arvind rails (blackmails ???) against outside. (Is Arvind any better than those advocates who openly practice before their uncle's  court). Do the Kejriwal's have some made in China Wall of secrecy between them at home ?. How is it that Arvind's rank and his wife's  rank moved in-step together till 2011 even though for 6 years he was absconding and consorting with foreign NGOs and accepting huge amounts
of foreign money.

C) Can Arvind deny that he accepted huge amounts of foreign exchange to conduct RTI inquiries to procure confidential bio-datas of serving senior public servants and then passed these on to the people  (foreigners) who paid for him when he was not reporting for duty in the guise of  "RTI Research".

These are not questions which Govt is asking or which Congress's DigVijaySingh is asking - Arvind's own former comrades also want to

know !! What sort of answer is it when Team Arvind says "all this information about Arvind is with the Govt and they should publish it"?

 Why doesn't Arvind put the same information suo-moto into public domain which  will clear his name and establish his bonafides  -UNLESS HE IS GUILTY  !!! Is Arvind as much a leashed sarkari poodle as Anna Hazare is.

Why is it that when Arvind & Co. get information they make a lot of noise (storm in a teaccup) from which nothing results. Empty vessels make the most noise.

When I got information about an extremely corrupt Union Minister, I got him removed in exactly 12 days and within 3 months Govt recovered over 3,000 crores  from parties he had favoured - and because of a registered (letter) PIL which I refused to withdraw despite many threats.

Finally, there is tremendous corruption in the Executive, but unfortunately nowadays the corruption in the Superior Judiciary is no better (if not actually worse).

Sarbajit Roy

On 11/12/12, Justice Kamleshwar Nath <justicekn@gmail.com> wrote:
> Is it all 'confusion worse confounded'? Is 'India Against Corruption' a
> Society; is it a Society registered under the Societies' Registration Act
> 1860? If it is not a Society, then is it merely a 'group of persons in
> association with each other' under Article 19(1)(c) of Constitution of
> India? If yes, then what are the particulars of each of the persons in the
> 'group'? Is it a legal entity entitled to sue and liable to be sued; if so,
> by what name?
>
> Now please do not mar the fair concept of India Against Corruption, because
> the CONCEPT has helped the PEOPLE to stand up as ONE throughout the length
> and breadth of the Country against the prevailing massive Corruption all
> around. The genius of the   man who created the 'phrase' deserves praise;
> and if he and his supporters do not want to debunk the concept,  they may
> give serious thought to convert IAC into a regular Society as known to Law,
> and join hands with  Arvind Kejriwal, Prashant Bhushan, Kiran Bedi and
> several other anti-corruption crusaders well recognized by the People as
> leaders of anti-corruption movement.
>
> It is recognized by all that a 'political alternative' is absolutely
> necessary for making an effective dent into current political inertia of
> protecting crime and corruption. Pro-crime/corruption takes shelter behind
> the so-called representative character of our Parliament because they know
> that they can successfully thwart any anti-corruption measure through
> Parliament. History records PM Narasimha Rao's corruption in Jharkhand
> Mukti
> Morcha matter to prevent the fall of his Government, that for 50 years the
> Parliamentary snags have prevented enacting an effective Lokpal Act, that
> properties continue to be amassed in Benami Transactions despite Benami
> Transactions (Prohibition) Act 1988 through the device of not framing Rules
> to effectuate the Statute, that persons with criminal antecedents continue
> to be elected to Parliament and Legislatures, that Section 8(4) of
> Representation of People Act, which is blatantly supportive of a Convicted
> Parliamentarian or Legislator, is not repealed, that in effect vast
> majority
> of Members of Parliament and Legislatures do not represent the aspirations
> of the People who elect them, that Parliamentary Privilege of immunity from
> action under Article 105(2)/ 194(2) of the Constitution continue to be
> abused, that no roll of their duties  was ever framed to be performed
> within
> their Constituencies or some sort of monitoring of their performance for
> the
> People to see - so on & so forth. The manner in which important laws are
> not
> framed under the so-called Supremacy of Parliament, despite repeated
> pronouncements of Supreme Court that Sovereignty vests in the People and

> only the Constitution of India is 'Supreme' - all call for a credible

> Political Alternative in the Parliament whatever the strength of the
> 'alternative party' may be. AAM AADMI PARTY is a good name.
>
>
>
>             The Nation will be grateful if the confusion is cleared at the
> earliest. May God be with you in your ventures of National Causes. With
> Deepawali Greetings,
>
>
>
>             Yours sincerely,
>
>                      KN
>
> From the Desk of :
>
> Justice Kamleshwar Nath
>
> Retd.
>
> Up-Lokayukta ( Karnataka ),
>
> Vice Chairman - C.A.T ( Allahabad ),
>
> Judge - High Court ( Lucknow & Allahabad )
>
> Address

> `Gunjan', C - 105, Niralanagar, Lucknow : 226 020. Uttar Pradesh, India

> Phone(s)
> +91-522-2789033 & +91-522-4016459. Mobile : +91-9415010746

Catch India as it happens with the Rediff News App. To download it for FREE, click here

Post: "hum@lists.riseup.net"
Exit: "hum-unsubscribe@lists.riseup.net"
Help: https://help.riseup.net/en/list-user
WWW : http://indiaagainstcorruption.net.in