PETITION BEFORE PARLIAMENT OF INDIA
Chapter-II Part-V Para - 1 to 10

HOME

 Gist of My Sufferings | Announcement | INDEX | Covering Letter | Main Petition | Competancy of Parliament | Chapter-II Part-I | Chapter-II Part-II | Chapter-II Part-III | Chapter-II Part-IV | Chapter-II Part-V Para - 1 to 10 | Chapter-II Part -V Para 11 to 25 | Chapter-II Part- V Para 26 to 40 | Chapter-II Part- V Para- 41 to 60 | Chapter-II Part-V Para-61 to 105 | Vohra Committee Report | RIGHTS OF CITIZENS AND ACCOUNTABILITY OF PUBLIC SERVANTS ACT

(ATROCITIES AND BLACKMAILING OF THE PETITIONER UNDER NEXUS BETWEEN POWERFUL POLITICIAN SHRI JYOTI BASU AND MAFIADOM RUNING UNDER LEADERSHIP OF ONE SANJAY KUMAR JHUNJHUNWALA )

    1. That as stated in the Part I hereinbefore that the Vohra Committee also relied upon the documents placed by the Petitioner, with reference to atrocities suffered by him under Politics-Bureaucratic-Crime-Nexus between Shri Jyoti Basu, the then Chief Minister of West Bengal and the said Mafia Sanjay Kumar Jhunjhunwala. Here the Petitioner placing more facts relates to constant atrocities caused by said Mafia and his associates to blackmail the Petitioner are referred with respective details. However, matter and facts relates to each and every atrocity caused by said Mafiadom is not referred, but some of them are referred particularly in which judicial officers were embraced by the said Mafiadom are referred in detail. This is once again Humble submission with undertaking that if charges of embracement of the Judicial Officers leveled by the Petitioner in this Petition proved as wrong after examining the matters on merit, he will relinquish all of his rights over each and every part of the properties referred herein, including the property, on which said Mafiadom failed or established any dispute.

    2. That as stated above under Part-I, the story relates to atrocities suffered by the Petitioner was started in the year of 1982, when he purchased some properties. The Petitioner is referring some of the facts relates to his victimisation, with the help of Public Servants from Government Machinery, by the embracement of the Judicial Officers, by influencing the Advocates to violate their Professional Conduct, besides use of the muscle powers under protection from the police, to arrange attempt to murder of the Petitioner, his son as stated in detail. The Petitioner is ready to submit the fact more elaborately, if Petition Committee so desires.

    2A. That in the year of 1932 C. S. Survey was conducted in the then Bengal by the dominion Government of India. As per C. S. survey which is the public document known and called as the Records of Rights and in the respective Map the measurement of the properties comprised in C. S. Plot No. 307, 308 under C. S. Khatian No.530, and C. S. Plot No.309, 310, 311 and 311/995 under C.S.Khatian No.534, both Khatian within Mouza Shahapur, P. S. Behala, now within the ward No. 119 of the Kolkata Municipal Corporation Kolkata-700038, the total area of measurement were shown as 1.10 Acres which arrived equivalent to 66 Cottas (One Cottar = 720 Square Feet) . Subsequently in the year of 1956 R. S. Survey was conducted by the Government of West Bengal under the Land Acquisition Act 1953, and in the said R. S. survey area of measurement with reference R. S. Plots comprised in R. S. Plot No.194 and 195 under R. S. Khatian No.530, corresponding from C. S. Plot No. 307, 308 under R. S. Khatian No.530, and R. S. Plot No. 205, 206, 207 and 219 under R. S. Khatian No.534 corresponding from C. S. Plot No.309, 310, 311 and 311/995 under C. S. Khatian No.534, both Khatians within the Kolkata Municipal Corporation Ward No.119, Kolkata-700038, were also arrived more or less as 1.098 which is more or less 1.10 Acres, equivalent to 66 Cottahs, and corroborating with C. S. Survey.

    3. That out of the aforesaid 66 Cottahs, 36 Cottahs of Land were comprised in C. S. Khatian No.530 that was purchased by one Nalini Mohan Dey in or about 1947 from its the then Owners. In respect of the rest Land measuring 0.50 Acre more or less equivalent to 30 cottahs of land was comprised in C. S. Khatian No.530. One Balram Pal, claiming himself as the owner of the said 30 Cottahs of Land, during the period of 1947 and 1954 executed Two / separate alleged Deeds in respect of the selfsame properties comprised in the aforesaid R. S. Plot No. 205, 206, 207 and 219 under said R. S. Khatian No.534 corresponding from C. S. Plot No.309, 310, 311 and 311/995 under said C. S. Khatian No.534, within the Kolkata Municipal Corporation Ward No.119, Kolkata-700038. Out of two said alleged deeds one was executed in favour of one adjudged Cheat Chittaranjan Ganguly and another alleged deed were executed in favour of the said Nalini Mohan Dey since deceased, whose predecessors-in-interests are Ava Rani Dey and Dipika Rani Bhattacharjee. Civil litigations were runs between the said Nalini Mohan Dey and said adjudged Cheat Chittaranjan Ganguly besides others. One administrative order was passed in 1955 by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Alipore, refusing application of said Chittaranjan Ganguly to deliver the said Deed allegedly executed by said Balram Pal in favour of said adjudged Cheat Chittaranjan Ganguly with finding that the said alleged deed executed in favour of the said Chittaranjan Ganguly was benami and the Chittaranjan Ganguly was the Benamdar of said Balaram Pal. Since 1955, till date said Chittaranjan Ganguly never challenged the said order. In a subsequent Civil Litigation, in which Nalini Mohan Dey and Chittaranjan Ganguly both were the parties, Judgment was pronounced that the said Balaram Pal was not an Owner; as such deed executed by the said Balaram Pal has "no legs to stand". However, in the said Judgment Court decided ownership of the Suit Khatian as well as Suit Properties on the basis of the "Records of Rights" prepared by the authorities of the State of West Bengal in the year of 1956 under R. S. Survey as aforesaid. All parties to the said Civil Litigation have relied upon the Records of Rights. Under the law too, said document is a valid evidence of the ownership, if not challenged by any party within the limit subscribed by the law, from the date of knowledge. Therefore, Chittaranjan Ganguly was not any scope to challenge the same, since he aware about the same since 1956. As per the aforesaid "Records of Rights", Nalini Mohan Dey was forcible occupier of the Properties comprised in R. S. Plot No. 205, 206, and 207 within aforesaid R. S. Khatian No.534 within the Kolkata Municipal Corporation Ward No.119, Kolkata-700038 since 1954 while one Rabindra Lal Chakraborty was forcible occupier of the properties measuring more or less 10 Cottahs of land comprised in R. S. Plot No. 219 under R. S. Khatian No.534 within the Kolkata Municipal Corporation Ward No.119, Kolkata-700038 since 1951. Accordingly said Nalini Mohan Dey was the owner of the properties measuring more or less 56 Cottahs of Land out of aforesaid 66 Cottahs, while said Rabindra Lal Chakraborty was owner of rest more or less 10 cottahs of land, as the claim of the Nalini Mohan Dey over the said properties was declared as "No legs to stand" on the basis of the Judgment of the trial Court, which was uphold unto the Honble Kolkata High Court.

    4. Legal heirs of the said Nalini Mohan Dey namely Ava Rani Dey and Dipika Rani Bhattacharjee with malafide intentions, from the beginning since 1982 misguided to the Petitioner, with the help of their Lawyer Learned Mr. Swapan Kumar Chakraborty, Advocate. They falsely claimed through their said Lawyer that they are owners of 70 Cottahs of the land, out of which one litigation is pending in respect of the properties measuring 3 Cottahs 13 Chittaks 26 Square Feet. Accordingly Petitioner entered in the Agreement with the said Ava Rani Dey and Dipika Rani Bhattacharjee. But, subsequently, it was transpired that according to the Deeds in favour of said Nalini Mohan Dey (including the said Deed executed by said Balaram Paul) the Total area of the properties was 66 Cottahs corroborating with the aforesaid C. S. Survey as well as R. S. Survey. This was further transpired that no litigation was pending as falsely claimed. The Photocopy of the letter showing such statement of Learned Mr. Swapan Kumar Chakraborty, Advocate and marked as Annexure " H-1".

    5. That accordingly, the Petitioner purchased 56 Cottahs of the landed properties comprised in R.S.Plot No.194 and 195 within the aforesaid R. S. Khatian No. 530, and R. S. Plot No. 205, 206 and 207 within R. S. Khatian No.534 both Khatians within the Mouza Shahapur P. S. Behala within ward No.119 of the Kolkata Municipal Corporation, Kolkata-700038 from the legal heirs of the said Nalini Mohan Dey namely Ava Rani Dey and Dipika Rani Bhattacharjee and subsequently he also purchased the rest properties more or less 10 Cottahs of the Land comprised in R. S. Plot No.219 from the legal heirs of said Rabindra Lal Chakrabortry, through one of his Private Limited Company. Out of the aforesaid 56 Cottahs of the Land Ava Rani Dey and Dipika Rani Bhattacharjee executed Sale Deeds in respect of 35 Cottahs of land but, failed to execute the Deeds in respect of the aforesaid rest properties measuring more or less 21 Cottahs of land comprised in R. S. Plot No. 195 and 206 because they failed to comply some legal formalities. The full consideration money were paid by the Petitioner and physical possession and power of Attorney for the same were delivered / executed along with other parts of the properties in favour of the Petitioner. As per the Income Tax Act the Petitioner was also owner of the properties comprised in the aforesaid R. S. Plot No.195 and 206 too. But, when aforesaid Vendors of the Petitioner namely Ava Rani Dey and Dipika Rani Bhattacharjee under connivance with the said Mafiadom intended to raise Disputes against the Petitioner, in the year of 1988, the Petitioner filed Two Suits for Executions of Sales Deeds, in respect of the aforesaid properties comprised in the aforesaid R. S. Plot No.195 and 206.

6. That at the time of the purchase of the property, Petitioner booked some flats for the persons from his friend circle and relations including one Shrawan Kumar Bhatter. Petitioner formed a Cooperative Society namely Nav-Surya Cooperative Housing Society and made all persons, who booked the flats with the Petitioner as promoters / members of the said Society, though the property was purchased by the Petitioner through his nominees. That at the time of purchase of the aforesaid properties there were 44 inhabitant families / Tenants under pendent Ejectment Suits. (Hereinafter called as the Tenants) As it was stated hereinbefore that the Petitioner is a social-minded person, as such immediately after purchase of the aforesaid properties, he offered rehabilitation of those tenants, knowing which some blackmailers entered behind the scene.

7. That considering constant and regular blackmailing activities cased by the aforesaid Tenants, being caused under abetment and criminal instigation from Kamlesh Chandra Chattopadhyay, Petitioner sent Letter dated 29.12. 1982 by Registered Post to the Officer-in-Charge of Behala Police Station and Leaders of the Tenants-under-Ejectment suit (hereinafter without prejudice referred as the Tenants) informing thereby, without prejudice, his intention to offer compromise with the 43 Tenants for their rehabilitation each of them with copy to Police, informing them upon compromise their rehabilitation is possible. This was the mistake on the part of the Petitioner, because those inhabitant under ill-advice thought that if pressure is created much more better proposal for payment of money may be given by the Petitioner. Photocopy of there said Letter dated 29th December 1982 is annexed herewith and marked as "Annexure I-1".

8. After several negotiations with the Tenants and modification (but without any advantage for the people behind the scene) by the Petitioner in the rehabilitation offer, one day Tenants entered in an agreement, under which both side agreed that compromise Petitions would be approved by Shri Som Nath Chatterjee, M. P. Since the Petitioner had no bad intentions, as such a Meeting of the representatives of the Tenants, Local CPI (M) Leader and the Petitioner was held at the residence of Shri Som Nath Chatterjee, M.P., where Shri Som Nath Chatterjee, M.P. suggested that for the implementation of the Compromise, the respective properties must be transferred in favour of the Cooperative Society. As the Petitioner was already intended to transfer the properties after development of Complex, fiduciary relationship with the aforesaid Promoters / Members of the said newly created Cooperative Housing Society, as such, under such fiduciary relationship, and under good faith he executed Sales Deeds in favour of the said Society without any payment of the consideration money, though under the fiduciary relationship with the Members, the consideration money were referred in the Sale Documents. Subsequently such fact were disclosed before the Income Tax Department under one of the Disclosure Scheme and Petitioner obtained appropriate Certificate from the Income Tax Department in that respect.

9. That during the same period, bad elements still were active behind the scene, with sole objects to exploit money from the Petitioner. As such they successfully instigated the tenants, not to enter in any compromise. This is needless to place on the record that till then petitioner have no intentions to eject or remove any of the Tenants from the properties, though he was very strong evidence to eject those tenants through due Court proceedings. Even in Two of the Ejectment Suits Decrees were pronounced, but the Petitioner not filed Execution Proceedings, till finally this was not proved that Compromise with Tenants were not Possible, and till the Petitioner finally not closed the doors of Compromise with the Tenants. Petitioner very well was aware that said bad element behind the blackmailing activities caused by the tenants was one the then CPI (M) Leader Kamlesh Chandra Chattopadhyay of 13, J.K.Pal Road, Kolkata-700038 (who subsequently (as per reports) was removed from the Party, after on the basis of complaint from the Petitioner, the then Advocate-General of West Bengal Late Snehangshu Acharya taken action and Intelligence Branch of West Bengal hold its enquiry and submitted its detail Report), but what Petitioner was not aware was the reality that he have very strong political clouds and connections even at the personal level with Shri Jyoti Basu, the then Chief Minister of West Bengal and Shri Som Nath Chatterjee, M.P. under which he was competent to blackmail the petitioner. In fact, said Kamlesh Chandra Chattopadhyay, behind the scene, misusing his such political the then stature, with sole intentions to blackmail the Petitioner, taken help from one Mr. Timir Baran Banerjee, Advocate and his junior Mr. Kalyan Kumar Ghosh, Advocate, both from Alipore Judge Court of Kolkata, to embrace one Judicial Officer Mr. Jayanta Kumar Dasgupta, the then Munsif, 5th Court at Alipore (Kolkata). The Petitioner was not aware of such developments, which were running behind the scene; as such Learned Mr. Som Nath Chatterjee M.P. who on behalf of the Tenants corrected the draft of compromise originally prepared by the Petitioner through his assistant Learned Mr. Pranab Chatterjee, Solicitor, under influence from said Kamlesh Chandra Chattopadhyay, falsely claimed in writing that "I had never myself recommended any settlement or finalized any draft for settlement of the case." as was referred in one Phumphlate published by the tenants. After knowing about alleged letter written by Shri Som Nath Chatterjee, M.P. as was appears in the Phumphlate, Petitioner sent photocopy of the corrected copy of the said draft, to Shri Som Nath Chatterjee, M.P, by Regd. Post, then reportedly the said earlier letter written by Shri Som Nath Chatterjee, M.P. was withdrawn from the respective locality. Photocopy of the draft prepared by the petitioner and corrected by the pen and hand of Shri Pranab Chatterjee, Solicitors, with reference to instructions from Shri Som Nath Chatterjee, M. P., and the said Phumplate published by the aforesaid inhabitants/tenants of the property of the Petitioner, Protest Letter Dated 07.05.1984 to Shri Som Nath Chatterjee, M.P., P-514, R.B.Roy Road, Kolkata-700029 by which Petitioner wanted to know whether he had issued any such letter as was claimed by the Tenants are annexed herewith and marked as "Annexure: I-2 to I-4" respectively.

10. That when in spite of all types of pressure tactics, Petitioner not bow down before the said Kamlesh Chandra Chattopadhyay, then finally he used said Mr. Timir Banerjee, Advocate of Alipore Court of Kolkata used the then Presiding Officer of the Learned Munsif, Alipore 5th Court, Mr. Jayanta Das Gupta to cause severe damages in the Court proceedings of the Ejectment Suits pending against the aforesaid tenants of the Petitioner, pending in the said learned Court by causing severe interpolations in several order sheets of respective suits. After knew about such interpolation, Petitioner filed 19 Application Under Section 340 of Criminal Procedure Code, before the said Court itself and then placed detailed facts of interpolations caused in the several Order Sheet by said Mr. Jayanta Das Gupta, before Honble Kolkata High Court, which caused such a situation under which said Jayanta Kumar Dasgupta could have lost his services. As such under such developments, on 25th November 1983, the petitioner was lifted by force from the Court compound in presence of about 500 litigants, Advocates and others, with the help of Court staff, as Mr. Jayanta Das Gupta made false statement, before the Court Staff of different Courts in Alipore (Kolkata), that because of the Petitioner, one of their colleague is going to loose his service. Since the said employee was physically disable to speak, and Mr. Jayanta Kumar Dasgupta kept him in captivity, as such till then fact was not known to the respective Court staff, as such they joined hands with the Peshkar of the said Court Mr. Narayan Babu to get arrested the Petitioner in a fabricated case of theft of Court records. Their original plan was to call the Petitioner in the Court Room then put him behind the bar. But this strategy failed when the Petitioner refused to comply the information given by the said Court Peshkar Narayan babu that Learned Munsif had called the Petitioner in Court Room, as the Petitioner replied that there is no date is fixed for today in any Court matter relates to his Suits, nor he is bound to go in the Court on verbal request of the Munsif. This reply was in considerations of his actions against the Mr. Jayanta Das Gupta the then Learned Munsif before Kolkata High Court, and threats given to the Advocates of the Petitioner, that if they do not make ready to the Petitioner to withdraw his proceedings from High Court, they can be get arrested. Under grace of the God when the Petitioner was lifted by force one senior reporter of the Telegraph was present who collected requisite informations and published the true story in the Telegraph within a Box News in its issue dated 29th November 1983. After released on bail, from the said Criminal Case Petitioner wrote letters to Chief Justice of India, Chief Justice of Calcutta High Court and other Judicial authorities, then matter was enquired by the Honble High Court at Kolkata and said Criminal Case was enquired by the senior Police Officials, as such petitioner was discharged from the said false case. Finally Mr. Jayanta Das Gupta was dismissed from the judicial Services. The said dismissal order of Mr. Jayanta Das Gupta from the judicial service was the first such action in the judicial history of India. The matter of the lifting by force and get arresting of the Petitioner in a false case was published in the Telegraph (the English daily Newspaper from Calcutta) dated 29th November 1983, and thereafter detail matter was also published in the renowned Bengali Newspaper: Ananda Bazaar Patrika dated 4th January 1984, after a thorough enquiry.