<b>SC surprised over filing of challan on holiday in Seer's case</b><!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->The Supreme Court was today taken by surprise over the filing of chargesheet on a holiday in the Sankararaman murder case in which the two Kanchi Sankaracharyas are facing trial.
<b>"How the Magistrate sat on holiday. How did he came to know that prosecution was to file a chargesheet that day," </b>a Bench comprising Chief Justice R C Lahoti and Justice G P Mathur observed during hearing of the plea of Sankaracharya Jayendra Saraswati seeking transfer of the case outside the State.
Senior advocate Fali S Nariman, appearing on behalf of Sankaracharya Jayendra Saraswati, pointed out that the chargesheet was filed in a Kancheepuram court on January 10 when it was a holiday on account of 'Eid'. He said the Magistrate sat the whole day waiting for it to be filed.
...........................
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
10-05-2005, 01:06 AM (This post was last modified: 10-05-2005, 01:07 AM by acharya.)
Surprising twist in Kanchi seer case
New Delhi, Oct 4.(PTI): The Supreme Court was today taken by surprise over the filing of chargesheet on a holiday in the Sankararaman murder case in which the two Kanchi Sankaracharyas are facing trial.
"How the Magistrate sat on holiday. How did he came to know that prosecution was to file a chargesheet that day," a Bench comprising Chief Justice R C Lahoti and Justice G P Mathur observed during hearing of the plea of Sankaracharya Jayendra Saraswati seeking transfer of the case outside the State.
Senior advocate Fali S Nariman, appearing on behalf of Sankaracharya Jayendra Saraswati, pointed out that the chargesheet was filed in a Kancheepuram court on January 10 when it was a holiday on account of 'Eid'. He said the Magistrate sat the whole day waiting for it to be filed.
The petition had alleged that the "surcharged atmosphere" in the state was not conducive for a fair trial.
He also questioned the conduct of police saying that the Investigating Officer Prem Kumar, before filing the challan, went with it to Varadarajaperumal Temple and performed puja.
However, the court said there was no objection to the officer going to temple before filing the chargesheet but the opening of the court and presence of Magistrate on a holiday for the chargesheet was a worrying factor.
Nariman said the fanfare and the statements by the police after the filing of the chargesheet were objectionable.
"The accused were not given the copy of the chargesheet. But each and every reporter was having a copy of it and the Investigating Officer told them that it was now between Varadaraja (god) and Sankaracharya," he said.
Nariman said that due to various acts of Chief Minister J Jayalalithaa, who is also the Home Minister, the atmosphere was totally surcharged and not conducive for free and fair trial of the case.
In this context, he referred to the suo motu statement of Jayalalithaa in the Legislative Assembly on November 17 last year in which she had stated that investigation had established that several persons, including the Seer, wanted to kill Sanakararaman.
The senior advocate said the atmosphere in the state was such that not even the advocates who came to defend the accused were spared by the state machinery.
"False cases were foisted on the advocates on the complaint of the wife of Ravi Subramaniam, the accused who has turned approver in the case," he said.
Nariman said even the journalist who wrote against the state action in the case had to face brunt of the prosecution and gave example of S Gurumurthy against whom a defamation case was registered by the state.
"All this creates an apprehension in the mind that the whole machinery was controlled by the state and for a fair trial the case has to be transferred outside the state," he said.
The other accused, including Junior pontiff Vijayendra Saraswati, has filed an affidavit supporting transfer of case outside the state.
However, senior advocate Shanti Bhushan, appearing for Ravi Subramaniam, who has turned approver, opposed the plea saying that the power to transfer the case has to be exercised in extraordinary circumstances which have not arisen in this case.
Only a few websites have reported that the Annual Meet of the Hindu Acharyas took place in Bombay on the 16th, 17th and 18th of this month.
'Intellibriefs' reported the whole text of Dr Subramnyam Swamy's speech during the occasion.
The English Language Media largely ignored this event.
Last year when the Swamijis met, the Kanchi Sankaracharya was also present and he spoke about the upliftment of the 'dalits' and other depressed classes. Perhaps as a consequence he was embroiled in a murder case (?)
When the Kanchi Acharya's bail application came up before the SC, the bench remarked that 'there did not appear to be a <i>prima facie</i> case'--yet allowed the case to proceed !
<!--QuoteBegin-chandramoulee+Oct 19 2005, 02:40 PM-->QUOTE(chandramoulee @ Oct 19 2005, 02:40 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin--> Which Acharya's turn will be this time around?
[right][snapback]39796[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Flight offloads Dwarka swami_ http://www.asianage.com/main.asp?layout=2&...2&newsid=187759
-Â By Our CorrespondentÂ
Mumbai, Oct. 19: Swami Avimukteshwarananda Saraswati, the successor to Swami Swarupananda Saraswati, the Shankaracharya of Dwarka Peeth, was made to disembark from an Indian Airlines flight for carrying his holy dand, a thin bamboo stick which is a symbol of their spiritual designation, inside the aircraft cabin
The swami was in Mumbai to attend the Hindu Sabha Acharya Sabha, a first of its kind organisation which held a two-day conference at Sanyas Ashram, Vile Parle. Despite repeated attempts to contact Indian Airlines, no airline official was available for comment.
Speaking to this newspaper, Swami Avimukteshwarananda Saraswati said, "Our work takes us on flights often. I have travelled on an aircraft over 225 times till date but never have I had such an experience." He added that it was the pilot of Indian Airlines flight IC-147 who objected to him carrying the five-foot, eight-inch long stick on board the aircraft.Â
According to the swami, he had been cleared in the security check stage and it was only after he occupied his seat that Indian Airlines staff came and requested him to keep the dand in the cargo compartment. He refused to part with the dand, saying it is always kept with his person, is a symbol of his mutt, and that keeping it away from his person would be sacrilegious.
"The behaviour of the pilot of the flight, which had over 50 per cent foreigners, made me feel like I am indeed a terrorist and I just wondered what the foreigners would be thinking of Hindu saints," the swami said. He said he got off the plane because he feared an incident could be created by Hindus on board the plane.
Swami Avimukteshwa-rananda Saraswati met senior Indian Airlines officials who apologised to him verbally, but refused to issue a written apology or refund the ticket. He had to wait at the airport for three hours before returning to Sanyas Ashram at Vile Parle. <b>"They just want me to forget the incident as a one-off incident and did not assure me of anything. Tomorrow, any saintly person of the Hindu dharma could face such treatment,"</b> he said.
Swami Vishveshwar Anand, the mahamandaleshwar of Sanyas Ashram at Vile Parle, Mumbai, said, "The dand is so small that it cannot injure anyone. We will definitely agitate against it and <b>there are many Hindu organisations that will be happy to raise this issue of ill-treatment of a Hindu saint of Swamijis stature</b>. Just yesterday we had discussed such issues of ill-treatment of Hindus at our conference. Today we are observing it."
There was a record attendance of 138 sampradayas and heads of akhadas, mutts and acharyas from all parts of India. Former President of India R.  Venkatraman also attended. There were several translators for the diverse  religious heads. Seven sampradayas from Assam attended this meet.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<b>SC orders shifting of seer's trial out of TN</b><!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Wednesday, October 26, 2005 (New Delhi):
The Supreme Court has ordered that the trial of Kanchi Shankaracharya Jayendra Saraswati be shifted out from Tamil Nadu to Pondicherry.
The Kanchi seer, who is the main accused in the murder of temple manager Shankaraman, had petitioned that Tamil Nadu Chief Minister Jayalalithaa was personally interfering in the trial.
His lawyers had claimed that the seer would not get a fair trial in the state.
<b>"We had said that the state machinery is being used in such a way that conviction is predetermined," said Krishna Kumar, the Shankaracharya's Counsel.</b>
<b>Major setback</b>
The order comes as a setback for the Jayalalithaa government, which has been sharply criticized by the apex court.
The court said the state machinery was interested not just in securing the petitioner's conviction, but also creating a fear psychosis in the minds of the people and blocking religious activities of various groups.
The SC also said the state could clearly not tolerate any kind of dissent, as was clear by its prosecution of prominent politicians and journalists.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Pioneer.com
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->"<b>The Superintendent of Police, SIT and police inspector connected with the investigation even went to the extent of prompting approver Ravi Subramaniam to make insinuation against a very senior counsel who has been practicing for over 43 years and is appearing as counsel for the petitioner," the court said.
"Launching of prosecution against prominent persons who have held high political offices and prominent jour nalists merely because they expressed some dissent against the arrest of the petitioner shows the attitude of the State that it cannot tolerate any kind of dissent which is the most cherished right in a democracy guaranteed by Article 19 of the Constitution," the court said.
The Court criticised the prosecuting agencies for showing "extra interest" in the case only on the ground that Sankaracharya, who has been chargesheeted in the case for allegedly entering into conspiracy to murder, is the head of the Mutt.
"It leads to an inference that the State machinery is not only interested in securing conviction of the petitioner (Seer) and other co-accused but also bringing to a complete halt the entire religious and other activities of the various trusts and endowments and the performance of pooja and other rituals in the temples and religious places in accordance with the customs and traditions and thereby create a fear psychosis in the minds of the people," the court said.
The Court said the action of freezing the accounts of the Mutt demonstrated the extent to which the State machinery could go while prosecuting the Seer in the Sankararaman murder case.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd--></b>
It is pertinent to recall now that so far not a single judicial victory has been had by Jayalalitha's goons.
This puts in perspective the original claims of many that incriminating evidence was about to tumble out in the very first week of the Acharyas' arrests.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>This swami was featured in Hinduism Today for being active in anti-conversion drives</b>
Dailypioneer
  <b>Gowda's guru in a soup </b>
      PT Bopanna / Bangalore
      After Infosys Chief Narayana Murthy, <b>it is the turn of former Prime Minister H D Deve Gowda's spiritual mentor Balagangadhara Natha Swamiji to face the music. Swamiji, who heads the Adi Chunchungiri Math, the influential math of the Vokkaliga community, was raided by the police for being in illegal possession of wild animals in his ashram located at Bellur, near Bangalore</b>.
      Â
   He is actively involved in running educational institutions in a big way. In the normal course, nobody would have taken on Swamiji. But he made the mistake of keeping three deers in his private park in the ashram, without a valid licence from the forest department.
  Â
   The forest cell personnel raided the ashram and quizzed the people present there on why they were keeping the animals without the having valid papers from the concerned authorities. Following the police raid, Swamiji has handed over the wild animals to the Mysore Zoo.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Political motivation to humiliate Swami. Why same treatment is not given to Arjun Singh?
Jayendrasaraswati and seven others have approached the Madras High Court seeking anticipatory bail, apprehending arrest on a fresh case being foisted on them!
Someone has preferred a complaint that JS along with seven others have stolen a siva lingam from a not so well-known temple near Mayavaram !
The presence of JS at the kumbhabhishekam ceremonies in that particular temple on the 12th or 15th of November 2005, seems to have been the motive behind this move to entangle him in this case also!
How some people do seem to hate him move around--albeit on bail !
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->The Madras High Court on Thursday night restrained the Tamil Nadu police from arresting the Kanchi seer Jayendra Saraswati till December 20 in a case pertaining to alleged theft of jewelery and a Shiva linga from a temple in Tamil Nadu.
Justice Sardar Zacria Husain gave this order after K S Dinakaran, counsel for the seer, rushed to his residence on coming to know that his client may be arrested at any moment as the case pertaining to the alleged theft was registered late Thursday evening.
After issuing the interim order, the judge posted the case for hearing to December 20.Â
...
In his petition, Jayendra Saraswati claimed that the Tamil Nadu government and the state police, 'aggrieved' over the bail he secured from the Supreme Court in the Sankararaman murder case, were "falsely involving him out of spite" in the case filed in Kottur police station in Tiruvarur.
The complainant had alleged on November 12, 2005, the seer had gone to the Periyakudi Siva temple with some aides, who, on his instruction, removed valuable jewels buried under the "peetam" (pedestal) of the idol and the idol itself, the petition said.
The seer contended the allegation against him "is false, frivolous, baseless, motivated and only an attempt by the state machinery to somehow spite him and make his life miserable." <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Madras High Court today quashed the entire case proceedings pending against S Gurumoorthy, a columnist, before the Kancheepuram Court following his articles in connection with the arrest of the Kanchi Acharya in the Sankararaman murder case.
Mr Justice M Jeyapaul quashed the proceedings while allowing a petition from Mr Gurumoorthy seeking to quash the chargesheet filed in the Kancheepuram Court.
Mr Gurumoorthy was charged for offences under Section 176, 179 read with Section 193 of IPC and Section 14 of the Press and Registration of Books Act, 1867.
According to police, with an intention to create false evidence and sidetrack the Special Investigation Team (SIT) from the murder case, Mr Gurumoorthy wrote misleading articles in a English daily.
The judge said punishable provisions of law contemplated under Section 14 of the Press and Registration of Books Act did not apply to false statements in articles, either in dailies or journals. The petitioner had been wrongly charged based on total misconception of law for offences under Section 14 of the Press and Registration Act.
Section 176 of IPC contemplated punishment for omission to furnish information on any subject to any public servant. Section 179 stipuated punishment for refusal to answer a public servant. The petitioner written articles expressing his point of view as a journalist. Irked by this, it appeared that the Chief Investigating Officer summoned him under Section 160 of Cr.P.C. and grilled him, which did not take the investigating officer anywhere, he added.
Usually, journalists collected information from furtive sources and published it for public consumption. No one could attribute special knowledge to the journalist about the information he had adverted to in the article, the judge said.
The judge said the fact remained that even before the article was published, the Investigating Officer had got material information in the shape of the FIR and had also arrested the accused concerned. It was not as if the petitioner withheld vital information, which led the investigating officer to grope in the dark. Therefore, the question of withholding vital information did not arise in this case.
The petitioner was not supposed to answer any question relating to the article he had written to the officer investigating the murder case. He was bound to answer only with regard to Sankaraman's murder. He had answered that he knew nothing of the murder, the judge added.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>SC stays case against Pioneer </b>
New Delhi
The Supreme Court has stayed criminal proceedings against the Editor of The Pioneer in a defamation case filed by the Tamil Nadu Government related to an editorial published in the paper on 25 November, 2004, on the arrest and trial of Kanchi Shankaracharya.
Senior counsel Arun Jaitley supported by Mr Ankur Chawla and Mr Gaurav Vats argued the case on behalf of The Pioneer seeking a stay on the proceedings and a plea for instant transfer of the case out of Tamil Nadu. The matter came up for hearing on Friday before the apex court bench of Justice Ashok Bhan and Justice Tarun Chatterjee.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
V.Gopalaswamy has spurned the open door of Jayalalithaa and has chosen to remain with the DMK alliance.
JJ may have to face the assembly elections alone.
She has reneged on almost all the measures taken earlier by her to improve governance in the State.
To please the christian lobby she undid the anti-conversion act
.
Will she please the Hindus also by withdrawing the State's case against the Shankaracharyas?
<!--QuoteBegin-chandramoulee+Feb 23 2006, 09:53 PM-->QUOTE(chandramoulee @ Feb 23 2006, 09:53 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->V.Gopalaswamy has spurned the open door of Jayalalithaa and has chosen to remain with the DMK alliance.
JJ may have to face the assembly elections alone.
She has reneged on almost all the measures taken earlier by her to improve governance in the State.
To please the christian lobby she undid the anti-conversion act
.
Will she please the Hindus also by withdrawing the State's case against the Shankaracharyas?
Hope she will....
[right][snapback]47193[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
If she does that then that wouldn't be a justice to the torture and humiliation she metted out to the Acharyas and the Brahmins as a whole. The SC should condemn her in front of the whole media and the media should carry it out in full force - so in effect this case should be heard in the SC and she should miserably and utterly fail in front of the SC judges and they should rebuke, insult, humiliate her in their judgement.
That day would come - as Krishna says in Gita. Adharma shouldn't win, even if it means the dharmic people suffer a little before Dharma reigns again.
This is a war for the Hindus, and this is the first battle against the Adharmic who rule India.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Â Press ReleaseÂ
Source : N.Umasankar
Category : International
BBC apologises and withdraws article against Kanchi Shankaracharya
Chennai ( Wednesday, March 8 , 2006 05:58:34 PM)
In response to protests from a group of devotees of Sri Jayendra Saraswathi, the Shankaracharya of Kanchipuram, the BBC has removed from its website an article by Mr. Vinod Mehta, the editor of Outlook magazine. Further, the BBC has paid out £4000 for the legal costs incurred to obtain this out-of-court settlement. These devotees came together on a web-based discussion forum, www.kanchiforum.org.
The website article was the transcript of a talk given by Mr. Mehta on 28 January 2005 on BBC Radio 4 about the Sankararaman murder case. After months of protracted protests, the BBC Complaints Unit authorities adjudicated that the talk contained âserious errorsâ and inaccuracies on several counts. Mr. Mehta had wrongly asserted that the charge sheet contained several police accusations of personal misconduct by the Shankaracharya. The BBC has apologized for the errors and the delay in reporting them.
On a number of points Mr. Mehtaâs account ran counter to the findings of the Supreme Court of India, made public some three weeks before the BBC talk titled âA View from India.â
Mr. Mehta had passed over the Supreme Court verdict in total silence.
Media contact details:
Mr N.Umasankar Advocate New No 71
Old No 29
burkit Road Thyagarayanagar Chennai 600017 Ph: 044 24339500 Mibile: 9444019500 email: tact@vsnl.com
annmaldas@yahoo.com
Mr S.Anantharaman Coimbatore Ph: 04224395400 mobile: 9894339485 email:anantharaman@touchtelindia.net
tact@vsnl.com<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
BBC apologises and withdraws article against Kanchi Shankaracharya
Chennai ( Wednesday, March 8 , 2006 05:58:34 PM)
In response to protests from a group of devotees of Sri Jayendra Saraswathi, the Shankaracharya of Kanchipuram, the <b>BBC has removed from its website an article by Mr. Vinod Mehta, the editor of Outlook magazine</b>. <b>Further, the BBC has paid out £4000 for the legal costs incurred to obtain this out-of-court settlement. These devotees came together on a web-based discussion forum, www.kanchiforum.org</b>.
The website article was the transcript of a talk given by Mr. Mehta on 28 January 2005 on BBC Radio 4 about the Sankararaman murder case. After months of protracted protests, the BBC Complaints Unit authorities adjudicated that the talk contained "serious errors" and inaccuracies on several counts. Mr. Mehta had wrongly asserted that the charge sheet contained several police accusations of personal misconduct by the Shankaracharya. <b>The BBC has apologized for the errors and the delay in reporting them.</b>
<b>On a number of points Mr. Mehta's account ran counter to the findings of the Supreme Court of India, made public some three weeks before the BBC talk titled "A View from India."</b>
<b>Mr. Mehta had passed over the Supreme Court verdict in total silence.</b>
Media contact details:
Mr N.Umasankar Advocate New No 71
Old No 29
burkit Road Thyagarayanagar Chennai 600017 Ph: 044 24339500 Mibile: 9444019500 email: tact@vsnl.com
annmaldas@yahoo.com
Mr S.Anantharaman Coimbatore Ph: 04224395400 mobile: 9894339485 email:anantharaman@touchtelindia.net
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The BBC has apologized for the errors and the delay in reporting them.[/b] [/color]
<b>On a number of points Mr. Mehta's account ran counter to the findings of the Supreme Court of India, made public some three weeks before the BBC talk titled "A View from India."</b>
<b>Mr. Mehta had passed over the Supreme Court verdict in total silence.</b>
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
[right][snapback]48243[/snapback][/right]
BBC has some decency to apologize. Mr. Mehta?
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->BBC has some decency to apologize. Mr. Mehta?<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Now a days Outlook had become mouth piece of terrorist organisation, Now we know who is behind. Mehta is sameless moron, don't expect anything from him.
