Monday, March 10, 2008


Singhania and Company LLP, Advocates and Solicitors


Operant conditioning is the use of a behavior's antecedent and/or its consequence to influence the occurrence and form of behavior. Operant conditioning is distinguished from classical conditioning (also called respondent conditioning) in that operant conditioning deals with the modification of "voluntary behavior" or operant behavior. Operant behavior "operates" on the environment and is maintained by its consequences, while classical conditioning deals with the conditioning of reflexive (reflex) behaviors which are elicited by antecedentconditions. Behaviors conditioned via a classical conditioning procedure are not maintained by consequences.

Burrhus Frederic Skinner (March 20, 1904 – August 18, 1990) was an Americanpsychologist, author, inventor, social philosopher,and poet.He was the Edgar Pierce Professor of Psychology at Harvard University from 1958 until his retirement in 1974.


St. James' Church, Delhi, also known as Skinner's Church, AnglicanChurch which is built in 1836 by Colonel James Skinner, is one of the oldest churches in Delhi [1][2], and part of the Church of North India Dioceseof Delhi [3]. Situated near Kashmiri Gate, it is located at the intersection of Church Road and Lothian Road. It was the church the Viceroy of India, attended until the Cathedral Church of the Redemption, near Gurudwara Rakab Ganj, was built in 1931 [2], only other church of that era, the St. Stephen's Church, at Fatehpuri, Delhi was built in 1867 [4]. Behind the church is bungalow of British Commissioners of Delhi, William Frazer, who is also buried in the church graveyard.

James Skinner CB (1778 – 4 December 1841) was an Anglo-Indian military adventurer inIndia, who became known as Sikandar Sahib later in life, and most known for two cavalry regiments he raised for the British, later known as 1st Skinner's Horse and 3rd Skinner's Horse (formerly 2nd Skinner's Horse) at Hansi in 1803, which still are a part of the Indian Army [1]

He was a fluent writer in Persian, the court an intellectual language of India in his day, and wrote several books in Persian, including "Kitab-i tasrih al-aqvam" (History of the Origin and Distinguishing Marks of the Different Castes of India), now with the

Library of Congres

It is said that James Skinner had fourteen wives and many children, one of whom was Mrs. Wagentreiber, who managed to escape the 1857 revolt due to the fact that he was greatly revered by the Indian Army regiments[14]. Many of his family members and their descendants are buried in Skinner's family plot, north of the St. James' Church, Delhi, where he lies buried today, just below the altar.

Skinner died at Hansi (in Hisar district, Haryana), on 4 December 1841, at the age of 64. He was first buried in the Cantonment Burial Ground at Hansi and later after a period of 40 days, he was disinterred, and his coffin was brought to Delhi, escorted by 200 men of Skinner's Horse, subsequently he was buried in Skinner's Church on 19 January 1842 in a vault of white marble immediately below the Communion Table .

Below his portrait in Urdu it says: Nasir ud-Daulah Col James Skinner Ghalib Jung

Evil Aggrawal killers of oswald -OSWAL knitwear of Ludhiana Sikhs and Jainism- symbolism since the murder of KennedyJI by heinous Islam-criminal conspiracy of these UK Indians who have organized crime killers on their pay roll and have also thus choked the entire criminal justice system of India attacking the ,good people/women and children and selling their organs to Arabs in Max Hospitals and Gangaram Hospital with heinous medical tourism and also party to all bomb blasts in India since 1993 as also 11 September terror attacks on America.Please read their jehadi portfolio and see why the common man is unable to get justice in India .

The entire justice system is in the hands of Aggrawal killers as also the entire Organized crime and thence they are making United Kingdom rule Over India as also the Arabs.All their investments together of extreme evil are invested in Burj Khalifa.

9/11/2001-Terrorist Aggrawal Baniya Samaj-Registered -Agrawal Sabha , Prashant Vihar.No.17836/15.7.1987.


Vaish Samaj regd.

Urban Estate, Sector 4 & 7
Gurgaon (Haryana)

Administrative Office

Vaish Samaj Dharamshala
Sector 4, Urban Estate
Gurgaon 122 001
Ph: 0124 - 4077616
About UsPDFPrintE-mail

Vaish Samaj, Urban Estate, Sector 4 & 7, Gurgaon was formed on 18th day of May, 1982. It got itself registered with the Registrar of Firms and Societies, Haryana under the Act. XXI of 1860 on 17th day of May, 1986.

Vaish Samaj is affiliated to Akhil Bhartiya Aggarwal Sammelan, New Delhi. Samaj's registered office is at House No 132, Sector - IV, Urban Estate, Gurgaon (Haryana) but all its day-to-day work is being carried out from Vaish Samaj Dharamshala, Sector - 4, Gurgaon.

In the begining area of operation of Samaj was Sector 4 and Sector 7, Urban Estate, Gurgaon but now it has extended its functioning to other areas of Gurgaon and National Capital Region (The NCR).

Aims & Objectives

Vaish Samaj was formed in order to fullfill certain aims and objectives of the Vaish Community.
Main aims and objectives are as follows :

  1. To develop co-operation among the Vaish brothern, and for overall development of the Vaish Community.
  2. To publish literature/souveneirs in order to develop sense of co-operation.
  3. To assist the poor and the needy.
  4. To arrange for jobs for the unemployed youth of Vaish Samaj and assist them to earn their livelihood
  5. To publish list of eligible candidates for marriage (both boys and girls) of the Samaj and make sincere efforts for their marriage.(For more details, visit Parichay Sammelan).
  6. To celebrate birth anniversaries of our great leaders, personalities of the Samaj and to celebrate festivals.
  7. To establish Libraries, Hospitals, Dharamshalas, Mandir's etc and to assist others in doing so.
  8. To arrange seminars, convocations, sports activities, for the overall development of the young boys and girls of the samaj.
  9. To work for the fulfilment of the aims and objectives of the Samaj, and to work for the development of a balanced country.

In order to fulfil above aims and objectives, Samaj has adopted an ideal constitution. Samaj has constituted working commitee of 21 Executive Members for the day to day work and implementing various programmes/schemes adopted by the Samaj for overall development of the Samaj brothern.


1Late Shri Shrichand Gupta208 / 7, Urban Estate, Gurgaon
2Shri Balraj Gupta258 / 4, Urban Estate, Gurgaon
3Late Shri Hari Chand Gupta7 / 7, Urban Estate, Gurgaon
4Shri Mitra Sen Gupta275 / 7, Urban Estate, Gurgaon
5Shri Gobind Ram Gupta374 / 7, Urban Estate, Gurgaon
6Shri Surender Kumar Mittal34 / 7, Urban Estate, Gurgaon
7Shri Sundar Das Aggarwal132 / 4, Urban Estate, Gurgaon
8Shri Suraj Bhan Aggarwal1149 / 4, Urban Estate, Gurgaon
9Shri Shyam kishore Aggarwal768 / 4, Urban Estate, Gurgaon
10Shri Hari Ram Gupta72 / 7, Urban Estate, Gurgaon
11 Shri Padam Chand Jain142 / 7, Urban Estate, Gurgaon
12Shri Kedar Nath Garg1041 /4, Urban Estate, Gurgaon
13Shri Shribhagwan Gupta360 / 7, Urban Estate, Gurgaon
14Shri Dharampal Goel3384 / 23, Urban Estate, Gurgaon
15Shri Kishori Lal Goel2003 / 4, Urban Estate, Gurgaon
16Shri Vijay Kumar Gupta

439 / 4, Urban Estate, Gurgaon

Welcome to Our Agrawal's Family

Mr. Adish C. Aggarwala
Senior Advocate Supreme Court Of India
Addl. Advocate General: Haryana and Punjab
Chairman: All India Bar Association
Convener: Indian Council of Jurists
Ex. Vice Chairman: Bar Council of India
Ex Vice President: Supreme Court Bar Association

Mr. Vijay Goel
Partner: Singhania & co, solicitors & indian advocates,
24 buckingham gate, london SW1E 6LB
Founder: Indo-EU Business Forum, London, UK
Advisor: CommonWealth Business Council &
Loomba Turst, London, UK
Member: Tie

Mr. Vinay Gulati
Graduate: IIT, Kanpur, Bachelor of Technology Degree in Computer Science and Engineering
Manager: Organizational change management Consultant, "Accenture" London, UK
Trainer: Inter-Cultural trainings and orientations to several IT professionals
Lead Appraiser: SEI authorized SCAMPI & CMMI course
Organizer: "Vegetarian Friends Interest Group" Accenture London, UK
He is an American and Committed to Hindu Society Worldwide

Mr. N.K. Agrawal
Founder member: Agrawal Samaj India
Founder member: Radha Krishan Mandir Shalimar Garden
Working for: Agrwal Community in Sahibabad,Ghazibad,
Working with: School Children to encourage religious Activities
at National Capital Region, Delhi
Ex. Lecturer: F.C.I. Collage, Badapur, Bijnor

Mr. Ashok Agrawal
A top class Industrialist in Delhi committed to Agrawal Society.

Mr. Yogesh Agrawal
Having reputed Business in Dehradun, Dealing Finance Matters. Committed to Agrawal Samaj and Vaish community

Mr. Yogesh Bansal
A well known Personality in the Field of Pharmaceuticals in Najibabad, India, Committed to
Agrawal Samaj and Hindu Culture

Vijay Goel
Contact I

Partner, Singhania & Co. LLP
Practice Experience
»Vijay Goel has been working at Singhania & Co for more than ten years. At present, he is a senior partner for the London office of the firm.
»He has expertise in advising clients on matters relating to corporate law, laws relating to joint ventures and foreign collaborations. He has expertise in real estate transactions and has completed some major real estate transactions in India.
»He has extensive experience in advising on private equity funds for investment in India and has worked with American and Indian companies for their listing on AIM, London. He has also assisted Indian companies to acquire companies in the UK.
»Vijay has worked on a deal, where his client, a Government of India Company, provided approximately USD 500 million to Reliance for their power project in the year 2009.
»He is the founder of the “Indo-European Business Forum” established in 2007 ( Members include members of the House of Lords, Members of Parliament and Members of European Parliaments and top business leaders from India and the UK including Messrs G.P. Hinduja, K.K. Modi, Mohit Burman, Jeh Wadia, Nikhil Gandhi and Raj Loomba.
»Vijay was conferred Asian Achievers 'Award for Professional of the Year' by Britain's minister of state for Justice Lord Tom McNally at a ceremony at the Wembley Stadium on Sept 30 2010.
»Mr. Goel was awarded the ‘National Law Day Award’ on 22 November, 2009 for his most exemplary contributions in commercial law and in strengthening Indo-UK business relations, from Her Excellency, Smt. Pratibha Devi Singh Patil, the Hon'ble President of Republic of India in a conference jointly organised by the International Council of Jurists, the All India Bar Association, the All India Sr Advocates Association and the Indian Council of Jurists (ICJ).
»The Chief Justice of India, Dr. Justice K.G Balakrishnan, was chairing the inaugural session. Present as special guests were Union Minister for Law and Justice Dr. M Veerappa Moily, Chief Justice of Singapore, the Hon’ble Mr Justice Chan Shek Keong and Judge, International Court of Justice and Hon'ble Justice Awn S. Al-Khasawneh.
»He has received the 'Glory of India Awards', for promoting investment between India and the UK
»He is also very active in organising charity work. He organised shows for earthquake victims in UP, India and has also organised charity shows for The Asian Guild UK ( Leading Bollywood stars including Amitabh Bachhan, Shahrukh Khan, Karan Johar, Yash Chopra, Hritik Roshan, Priety Zinta and Rakesh Roshan attended the same with thousands of British Asians.
»He has also been awarded as the 'Asian Leadership in Europe' by Asian Who's Who International at a Gala ceremony held at the Dorchester Hotel, Park Lane, London on 30th November 2009.
»He is Special Advisor to the Commonwealth Business Council (CBC) for investments ( CBC has top connections in more than 53 countries
»He is Advisor to "The Loomba Trust" (
»The Loomba Trust was established in the UK on 26 June 1997. The Trust aims to educate the children of poor widows throughout India. The Trust was officially launched in London on 25 March 1998 in the presence of the British Prime Minister, The Rt. Hon. Tony Blair MP and his wife, Cherie Blair QC. The Trust also received the support of the Prime Minister of India, The Honourable Atal Behari Vajpayee, who inaugurated the Trust in New Delhi on 31 March 1999 by lighting a lamp at his residence. The Trust was honoured when Cherie Blair QC, became the first Patron of the Trust in 1998.
»He is also Trustee of The Rajasthani Foundation UK, pls visit . Rajasthani Foundation is supported by all top Rajasthanis such as Mr L N Mittal, Sir Gulam Noon, Mr Gokul Binani
»He is General Secretary of UK Chapter to International Council of Jurists (
»He is a Patron of Agrawal Samaj, India (
»He is a Member of Advisory Council of UK India Business Angel Network, which is promoted by UK India Business Council and Govt of United Kingdom (§ionid=3 )

Achievements:Achievements: :

Member, High Court Bar Association, New Delhi.

Executive Board Member of "The Asian Guide UK"

Executive Committee member of Indian Lawyers Association UK

Executive Member of Managing Partners Forum UK

Member of International Association of Business Leaders, Inc.

Member of "Asian Who's Who" UK

Charter Member of "T I E" (The Indus Enterpreneur) UK

Received "Glory of India" award in 2006 for promoting investment between India-UK

Chairperson of a panel on real estate investment in India
( )

Spoke at conferences in Lugano (Switzerland) and Milan (Italy) about conducting business with India

Spoke in London on Investments in India at "Business India Forum"

Member of London Chamber of Commerce and Industry

Trustee of Singhania Education foundation Trust, UK

Led a high level of investor delegates from UK to India for Govt of Madhya Pradesh for their Global Investor Summit, held at Indore, India on 26th and 27th October 2007

Hosted a conference in London where Indian Law Minister was guest speaker in partnership with UKIBC, Law Society in July 2008. Some 225 business people attended.

Organised a conference in London on 31st October 2008 where Chief Justice of India, Justice Bala Krishnan was the main speaker on the subject of " Judicial Reforms in India" together with the Indian High Commissioner in London, Mr Shiv Shankar Mukerjee. Some 150 business people attended.

Coordinator of a high level delegation of the Commonwealth Business Council, UK for the Government of Gujarat for its Vibrant Gujarat Summit in January 2009. He took 25 investors to Gujarat from London.

Arranged a high level conference in June 2009 for the International Council of Jurists in partnership with The Honourable Society of Lincoln’s Inn at the Law Society of England and Wales Building, Approximately 60 Judeges from India including Chief Justice of India attended the conference.

EducationEducation :

Bachelors of law in Business Law & Tax (LL.B)

Post Graduate Diploma in Business Administration

EducationPublications :

Articles in Hindustan Times, a prominent English daily in India

Joint Articles in “The In House Lawyers Magazine” on various subjects such as Private Equity in India, Real Estate, Infrastructure investments in India and other relevant subjects.

Phone Number: 0044 20 7799 1688
Fax Number: 0044 20 7799 1687
Email ID:
nfo :

M.D.C. - Maschera di cera (1997)


Wax Mask
Buy Now

  • Rating: StarStar
  • Genre: Horror
  • Movie Type: Crime Thriller, Gothic Film
  • Themes: Serial Killers, Mind Games, Crime Sprees
  • Director: Sergio Stivaletti
  • Release Year: 1997
  • Country: FR/IT
  • Run Time: 95 minutes

Migrant Immovable Property Act. 1997

(a) "ACT" means the Jammu and Kashmir Migrant Immovable Property (Preservation, Protection and Restraint on Distress Sales) Act, 1997

Office of Divisional Commissioner


Alieanation of migrant Property
[Migrant Immovable Property Act & SRO 364]

Page 1 2 3 [Previous]


Enrollment No


Applicant Name


S/O, D/O, W/O


Date of Birth


Permanent Address


Telephone No


Temporary Address




See full-size image.

Paris, 1900: a couple are horribly murdered by a masked man with a metal claw who rips their hearts out. The sole survivor and witness to the massacre is a young girl. Twelve years later in Rome a new wax museum is opened, whose main attractions are lifelike recreations of gruesome murder scenes. A young man bets that he will spend the night in the museum but is found dead the morning after. Soon, people start disappearing from the streets of Rome and the wax museum halls begin filling with new figures.

In the grand tradition of Britain's Hammer low-budget horror films of the '60s, this Gothic and gory chiller is the third screen version of Gaston Leroux's tale The Wax Museum. The prologue is set in turn-of-the-century Paris at New Years. Just as the bells ring out, a young sleeping couple are attacked by a hooded figure whose hand has been replaced by a fearsome steel claw. Their gruesome deaths are witnessed by their unseen little girl. The story moves ahead 12 years and moves to a Roman brothel where Lucas, a young patron, accepts a bet to spend an entire evening in a particular wax museum filled with gruesome reenactments of the world's most horrible crimes. Though he knows the figures are only wax, they literally horrify Lucas to the point of death. The official cause is listed as heart failure, a fact that attracts considerable attention from the press causing the curator, Boris, to devise a new set of grim tableaux. His latest creations are chillingly real, mostly because they are real but for the special chemical Boris injects into them. The curator's diabolical schemes unravel shortly after he hires Sonia, the little girl from the prologue, as his new costumer. The museum exhibits bring her childhood trauma flooding back to the surface. Fortunately, her lover, an ingenious reporter has teamed up with a determined police inspector who has been investigating her parents' murder for the past 12 years. The film is dedicated to Lucio Fulci, one of Italy's premiere masters of schlock horror who died during production in March, 1996. He was replaced by first-time director Sergio Stivaletti. ~ Sandra Brennan, All Movie Guide

Madame Tussauds and the London Planetarium.Madame Tussauds and the London Planetarium.
Madame Tussauds in New York City

The Queen's personal fortune has been the subject of speculation for many years. Sometimes estimated at US$10 billion, recently Forbes magazine conservatively estimated her fortune at around US$500 million (£280 million).[71] This figure seems to agree with official Palace statements that called reports of the Queen's supposed multibillion-dollar wealth "grossly over-exaggerated;" however, it conflicts with a total addition of the Queen's personal holdings. Her personal art collection is worth at least £10 billion, but is held in trust for the nation, and cannot be sold.

The Queen also privately owns large amounts of property that have never been valued, including Sandringham House and Balmoral Castle. Press reports, upon the death of the Queen Mother, speculated that the Queen inherited estate worth around £70 million.[72] Furthermore there is control and ownership of the Duchy of Lancaster, which is valued at £310 million and transferred a private income to the monarch of £9.811 million in 2006.

The Queen also technically owns the Crown Estate with holdings of £6 billion; however, the income of this is transferred to the Treasury in return for the civil list payments.

Canadian national unity
Statue of Elizabeth II, Commander-in-Chief of the Canadian Forces on horseback, on Parliament Hill, Ottawa.
Statue of Elizabeth II, Commander-in-Chief of the Canadian Forces on horseback, on Parliament Hill, Ottawa.

While not speaking directly against Quebec sovereignty in Canada, she has publicly praised Canada's unity and expressed her wish to see the continuation of a unified Canada, sometimes courting controversy over the matter. Like her mother, the Queen has shown an affection for Canada, stating in 1983, when departing California, "I am going home to Canada tomorrow," and at a dinner in Saskatchewan in 2005: "this country and Canadians everywhere have been a constant presence in my life and work."[42] She has also stated that Canada feels like "a home away from home".[43]


Aristotle Onasis twin short version of Paltu Charles of Jeddah.,_Prince_of_Wales The Prince Charles, Prince of Wales[1] born 14 November 1948), is the eldest son of Elizabeth II and Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh. (Charles Philip Arthur George;
Charles is Heir Apparent, equally and separately, to the thrones of sixteen sovereign states known as the Commonwealth realms; he will most likely reside in and be directly involved with the United Kingdom.

This activity is not confined to the United Kingdom. For example, as heir to the Canadian throne OF MAILOT OF JESSICA LAL MURDER CASE , he has aimed to use his tours of that country as a way to help draw attention to relevant issues, including youth, the disabled, the environment, the arts, medicine, the elderly, heritage conservation and education.[29]

Further information: Royal visits to Canada

The Prince is regarded by some as an effective advocate for the United Kingdom. On a visit to the Republic of Ireland, for example, he delivered a personally researched and written speech on Anglo-Irish affairs that was warmly received by Irish politicians and the media.

Second marriage/Relationship with Camilla Parker Bowles

On 10 February 2005, it was announced by Clarence House[26] that the Prince of Wales and Camilla Parker Bowles would marry on 8 April of that year, in a civil ceremony at Windsor Castle, with a subsequent religious blessing at the castle's St George's Chapel. Subsequently, the location was changed to the Guildhall, Windsor, possibly because of the discovery that Windsor Castle might have to become available for other people's weddings, should theirs be performed there. On Monday 4 April, it was announced that the wedding would be delayed for one day to 9 April to allow the Prince of Wales and some of the invited dignitaries to attend the funeral of Pope John Paul II.

The Orthodox Church

Prince Charles is also interested in Orthodox Christianity.[51][52] Each year he spends time in the Orthodox monasteries of Mount Athos in Greece[53] , and has also visited monasteries in Romania.[54][55] With his father, Prince Philip, who was born and raised Greek Orthodox, he is a patron of the "The Friends of Mount Athos" organisation. Prince Charles was also the patron of the "21st International Congress of Byzantine Studies,"[56] a forum dedicated to the study of the history and art of the former Orthodox Roman Empire, also known as the Eastern Roman or Byzantine Empire.


Another of the Prince's greatest areas of interest continues to be philosophy, especially the philosophy of Asian and Middle Eastern nations, as well as so-called New Age theology. He had a friendship with author Sir Laurens van der Post, whom outsiders called the "guru to Prince Charles", starting in 1977 until van der Post's death in 1996; such was his friendship with van der Post that the author was named godfather to Prince William. In 2006, the Prince praised "that wonderful Kabbalistic diagram of the Tree of Life", as expounded by Warren Kenton, a teacher at the Temenos Academy.[57]

Genesis: The Creation of the Saudi Crime Syndicate

November 8, 2007 · No Comments

Conspiracy Archive | Oct 6th, 2007

by Paul & Phillip D. Collins

When it was discovered that money from Saudi Princess Haifa bint Faisal had found its way, into the hands of Al Qaeda operative and advance man for the 9/11 hijackers Omar al-Bayoumi, the Saudi Princess put forward one of the worst alibis ever concocted. Princess Haifa claimed that she was giving the money to a woman named Majeda Ibrahin Dweikat so she could treat her thyroid condition (”The Saudi Money Trail,” no pagination). The good Princess claimed she had no idea that Majeda and her husband, Omar Basnan, were passing the money to Omar al-Bayoumi (no pagination).

The problem is that Majeda’s husband, Osama Basnan, was known to be a “vocal Al-Qaeda sympathizer” (no pagination). According to a law enforcement official, shortly after the 9/11 attacks, Basnan “celebrated the heroes of September 11″ and referred to September 11 as a “wonderful, glorious day” (no pagination). Basnan is also known to have “met with a high Saudi prince who has responsibilities for intelligence matters and is known to bring suitcases full of cash into the United States” (no pagination). Princess Haifa also connected to Omar al-Bayoumi through her husband, Prince Bandar bin Sultan. Omar al-Bayoumi had worked for Dallah Avco, the aviation services company owned by Prince Bandar’s father, Prince Sultan (no pagination). All of this seemed to suggest that more connected Princess Haifa to Omar al-Bayoumi than just unintended charity.

However, the 9/11 Commission accepted Princess Faisal’s alibi at face value. Why did the Commission give thumbs-up to such a flimsy explanation? The Commission never intended to find the truth behind 9/11. Its job was to cover up the fact that the United States government and the American aristocracy were intimately tied to the amalgam of terrorist financiers and criminals collectively referred to as the Saudi elite or Saudi Royals. This alliance goes back to the birth of the modern state of Saudi Arabia. This genesis story doesn’t begin with a charismatic Arab leader, but with a member of British intelligence: St. John Philby, known also as Jack Philby.

Jack Philby: Saudi Arabia’s Founding Father

Many people are more acquainted with Jack Philby’s son, the notorious Communist double agent, Harold Adrian Russell Philby, also known as Kim Philby. However, Jack’s story is no less important. Jack could be considered the founding father of Saudi Arabia. Jack Philby was a British Civil Servant who was dismissed for sexual misconduct (Loftus and Aarons 25). From there Jack was picked up by British secret service MI6 in 1915 (25). The British secret service was known for its anti-Jewish ranks that viewed all Jews as secret communists (31-2). The anti-Jewish sentiments found in the British secret service had trickled down from the British power elite.

The British saw the Balfour Declaration as merely a foreign propaganda tool meant to get American military support during World War 1 (29). The British actually favored more of an Arab presence in the Palestine territory with a small Jewish minority to placate America (29). This is why the Balfour Declaration of 1917 promised that Palestine would be “a national home” as opposed to “the national home” for the Jews (29). The Balfour Declaration’s language would allow for a situation where the Jews would be insignificant in the Middle East.

Jack’s involvement in British secret service probably helped shape his anti-Jewish mindset. John Loftus and Mark Aarons elaborates:

During the early 1920s, Philby and his secret service colleagues did everything they could to undercut Zionist immigration. Philby’s secret service station organized anti-Jewish propaganda in Palestine. To be fair, he was merely carrying out a policy organized by his predecessors to stir up the Arabs against the Jews. According to several of our sources, Great Britain was the first modern country to use its intelligence service to organize terrorist acts against the Jews. (33)

However, Jack was more than just a Jew-hater. Philby’s fanaticism went much further than the fanaticism of his colleagues in MI6 or the British power elite. While the British power elite and MI6 were anti-Jewish, they were still not supportive of Arab self-determination and political independence. From the perspective of the British oligarchs and MI6, the Arab world was to be divided into French and British spheres of influence.

The secret Sykes-Picot agreement of 1916 was concocted for just this purpose (28-9). Jack Philby was fanatically pro-Arab. In 1917, Jack met with the chieftain of the Wahhabi sect, Ibn Saud (30). This was supposed to be just a minor political mission, but what came out of it was an alliance between Jack and Ibn Saud as well as Philby’s adoption of Wahhabism (30-1). Philby passed intelligence information to Ibn Saud that allowed the House of Saud to defeat Sharif Hussein and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia was born (35).

Did Jack Philby help found Saudi Arabia on behalf of the British power elite and MI6? In all likelihood, the answer is no. Philby’s support of Ibn Saud was motivated by his hatred for Britain. When Philby realized that British promises of Arab independence were not genuine, he broke politically with England (28). Still, Philby’s pro-Arab fanaticism buttressed the British power elite’s anti-Jewish agenda. While he may have been a renegade, Jack Philby’s work seemed to always help one or more faction of the power elite. This included the American elite. With the aid of Allen Dulles, Jack Philby would connect the Saudi elite to American elite.
Dulles, Big Oil, and ARAMCO

In the 1930s, Philby was able to convince Ibn Saud to allow foreign investment in the Kingdom in the name of discovering oil. Philby convinced Ibn Saud to allow Charles Crane to facilitate exploration of Saudi Arabia’s subsoil assets (42). In 1933, Standard Oil of California (SOCAL) negotiated with Philby for a 60-year contract that allowed SOCAL to have exclusive rights to explore and extract oil (42-3). This was the beginning of what would become the Arabian-American Oil Company (ARAMCO). The U.S. State Department classifies ARAMCO as the richest commercial prize in the history of the planet (”St. John Philby,” no pagination).

A key player in the creation of ARAMCO was Dulles ally James Forrestal. Forrestal brought SOCAL and Texaco together in an agreement that formed Caltex, the parent company of ARAMCO (Loftus and Aarons 63). James Forrestal’s ties to the Dulles brothers were extremely important. Not only was the Dulles brothers agents of the power elite, but Allen Dulles had also been in a criminal relationship with Jack Philby since 1921 (39). In that year, Philby, who was then the secret service head of intelligence for Transjordan, met Allen, who was then stationed in Istanbul (39). Allen helped Jack guarantee the economic and political survival of Ibn Saud through his connections to American oil companies (38). Together, Philby and Dulles helped build the modern state of Saudi Arabia and connect the American elite to the Saudi elite.
The 9/11 Cover-Up

A real inquiry into the September 11th attacks would have proven disastrous for the American power elite. A genuine investigation would have revealed that the Saudi elite had their hands all over the attacks. This would have led to a deeper examination of the Saudi elite, which would have revealed that the American power elite has been connected to the Saudi criminal and conspiratorial infrastructure since Philby and Dulles created it.

A bogus investigation had to be concocted. The first indication of a cover-up came when President Bush attempted to appoint Henry Kissinger to head the 9/11 Commission. Kissinger’s consulting firm, Kissinger Associates, has had dealings with Saudi Arabia in the past (Scheer, no pagination). When the public and activists raised the roof over this move, Henry was replaced with Thomas Kean. Kean is the director of oil giant Amerada Hess (Hicks 76). At the time of the 9/11 hearings Amerada Hess was conducting a joint venture with the Saudi Arabian oil company Delta Oil (76). The idea that Kean would follow the Saudi money trail of 9/11 was laughable.

The political landscape is filled with many discomforting truths that the common man must wrap his head around. One of those truths is that those who claim to be defending us are in bed with the very forces they claim to be defending us from. The connection between the American elite and the Saudi elite illustrates this point. It is time to take responsibility for our own protection, instead of leaving it in the hands of those who see us as cattle to be harvested.

Shouts of ‘murderers’ and ‘torturers’ greet King Abdullah on Palace tour

November 1, 2007 · No Comments

Saudi Arabia’s King Abdullah (R), Britain’s Queen Elizabeth (L) and her husband Prince Philip, The Duke of Edinburgh (C), arrive for a group photograph ahead of a State Banquet at Buckingham Palace in London October 30, 2007. King Abdullah met the Queen on Tuesday at the start of a two-day state visit that has attracted widespread criticism of the Saudi human rights record.

Independent | Oct 13, 2007

By Colin Brown

One of the most controversial state visits to Britain of recent times began officially yesterday with a royal welcome, set against a backdrop of protest placards.

King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia was officially welcomed by a guard of honour with the Queen at Horseguards Parade. Gordon Brown, Jacqui Smith, the Home Secretary, and the Foreign Office minister Kim Howells joined dignitaries on the dais. The King then lunched with the Queen and the Duke of Edinburgh in the Bow Room at the Palace before being shown a specially created exhibition of Saudi items from the Royal Collection.

Beyond the gates of the Palace, however, the growing outcry continued. Protesters calling for the reopening of a corruption inquiry into a multibillion-dollar arms deal for Typhoon fighters from the UK jeered the Saudi King as the Government rolled out the red carpet to greet him. Scores of protesters shouted “murderers”, “torturers”, and “shame on you” at King Abdullah as he passed by in a gilded horse-drawn coach.

King Abdullah greeted by Darth Vader theme music

As the Prime Minister welcomes the King to No 10 today, Labour MPs are planning a demonstration outside the Saudi embassy in London.

Vince Cable, the acting leader of the Liberal Democrats, who is boycotting events during the visit, said Mr Brown should answer a list of questions including whether he has sought an apology over the arrest and torture of the British expat engineer Sandy Mitchell by the Saudi authorities. Mr Mitchell is expected to be among the protesters.

Mr Cable said Mr Brown should raise with the Saudi King five causes of civil rights abuses in the country – gender discrimination, the death penalty, cruel punishments, the wholesale use of torture and the ill-treatment of homosexuals.

On corruption charges, including alleged “backhanders” for arms deals, Mr Cable asked: “Why is it that the UK has dropped the investigation into Al Yamamah deal in the same year that the US has opened an investigation into the issue? Will Mr Brown reopen the investigation by the SFO into BAE Systems and alleged corruption with regards to Saudi Arabia?” Would Mr Brown give his backing to the release of the National Audit Office report into the Al Yamamah case – which is the only report conducted by the NAO which has never been released?

He said Mr Brown also needed to say whether the Government was giving full co-operation to the US Justice Department, or whether he believed the US action compromised international security. Would he co-operate if the US charges were brought against British Government officials? Mr Cable asked.

More than 30 MPs and celebrities have also signed an open letter protesting at the visit. One of the signatories, the comedian Mark Thomas, 44, who helped the group Campaign Against Arms Trade organise the protest, said: “It’s really important to show opposition to this disgusting hypocritical state of affairs where governments, rules of law, human affairs and democracy are cast aside to worship a barrel of oil.”

Another signatory, Clare Short, the former secretary for international development who resigned from the Blair government, accused the Government of an “absolutely craven foreign policy” towards Saudi Arabia. “It is not just that the Saudis have a terrible record on human rights at home. They are exporting an extreme fundamentalist form of Islam. We should not be giving a state visit to this regime,” she said.

The human rights activist Peter Tatchell said it was “incredible hypocrisy” for ministers to condemn the Burma and Zimbabwe while saying nothing about human rights abuses in Saudi Arabia. He said: “It just shows oil and arms sales seem to have bought the Government’s silence.”

Peter Kilfoyle, a former defence minister, and a string of trade union leaders such as Tony Woodley, joint general secretary of Britain’s biggest union, Unite, were also among the signatories. “We believe that there is a conspiracy of silence about the human rights abuses being perpetrated by the Saudi regime,” their letter said.


05:20 From: diwana74
Views: 1,272

See full-size image.
110 x 129 - 7k

Mr. S. Ramani is an officer of the Indian Police Service from 1970 batch of Tamil Nadu Cadre. He is at present Additional Director General of Police (Head Quarters). Earlier, he had a long tenure as the Director of Fire and Rescue Services and did a lot to professionalise the working of the Department. In recognition of his deep interest in matters relating to fire and safety, the Government of Tamil Nadu made him a Member of the Fire and Rescue Commission constituted to study the working of the Department and suggest improvements.



See full-size image.
163 x 140 - 17k
See full-size image.
140 x 100 - 6k
See full-size image.
222 x 237 - 7k

Mr. S. Ramani is an officer of the Indian Police Service from 1970 batch of Tamil Nadu Cadre. He is at present Additional Director General of Police (Head Quarters). Earlier, he had a long tenure as the Director of Fire and Rescue Services and did a lot to professionalise the working of the Department. In recognition of his deep interest in matters relating to fire and safety, the Government of Tamil Nadu made him a Member of the Fire and Rescue Commission constituted to study the working of the Department and suggest improvements.





S. Ramani, I.P.S.

Addl. Director General of Police,

Head Quarters.

The Delhi High Court delivered a land mark judgment recently in Civil Writ No. 4567/1999 on 24.04.2003, in what is commonly called the Uphaar Tragedy Case. This was widely reported in the media. It is important to have a close look at the judgment by the law enforcement agencies, because several critical issues have been raised and directions given. It has opened up a totally new dimension in the area of public safety. Many important legal issues such as payment of compensation and other statutory issues and administrative issues etc. have been dealt with in the judgment and it is necessary to understand them.

2. The facts in brief are that in the posh area of South Delhi called Green Park, is located the Uphaar Cinema. It was constructed in 1973 and renovated in 1996/1997. The first film screened after renovation was “Border”, which had a patriotic theme. On 13.06.1997, during the matinee show of the film, immediately after the interval, the audience in the cinema hall saw smoke coming out of the side of the screen. Most of the patrons sitting in the hall thought that it was some special effect, which was part of the film, little realizing that a fire had broken out. By the time they realized the gravity, smoke had engulfed half the building. The entire balcony and the stairs leading to it were full of smoke. It was impossible for the people to leave and as a result 59 people died which included infants and children. 103 others sustained injuries.

3. A petition was filed in the Delhi High Court by the Association of victims of Uphaar Tragedy. By this writ, besides claiming compensation, the petitioners have also tried to highlight the shocking state of affairs in the cinema hall and the inadequate safety arrangements. The petitioners claimed that there was complete disregard to the statutory obligations prescribed under the law for the prevention of fire hazards in public places. They alleged that each and every public authority not only failed to discharge its statutory obligations but in fact acted in a manner which was hostile to the discharge of their public duties. Licence and permits were issued with utter disregard to the mandatory provisions of inspections and ensuring safety standards. They contended that scores of cinema halls were and are permitted to run without any inspection and without licence. Permits are issued mechanically and for a price. The petitioners prayed for adequate compensation for the victims and punitive damages against the respondents for showing disregard to the statutory obligations.

4. An initial objection was raised on behalf of the respondents, viz. the Government officials and it was argued that a writ petition was not an appropriate proceeding for deciding the cause and responsibility for the unfortunate incident. The Court ruled that the petition was maintainable. It held that enterprises which are engaged in hazardous activities and which pose a potential threat to the health and safety of the persons working in the factory and residing in the surrounding areas owe an absolute and non-delegable duty to the community to ensure that no harm results to any one. The enterprise has an obligation to conduct its activity with highest standards of safety and if any harm results, it is liable to compensate for such harm. The Court held that even if there was no negligence, but it was proved that there were statutory violations of safety standards by the authorities, these violations may be sufficient to hold the respondents liable to pay compensation for the victims and for the damages. It is very important to note this point.

5. Building Plan Violations:

Uphaar Cinema was started in 1973 and licence was given under the provision of the Delhi Cinematographic Act, 1953 by the District Magistrate. In 1975,the Delhi Administration reduced the cinema tickets rates by 10%. The cinema owners felt aggrieved and represented to Delhi Administration that their expenses had gone up and the reduced rates, were unbearable. This representation was considered by the Lt. Governor and Delhi Administration agreed to relax the rules and allowed the licencee to add more seats in their halls to make good the loss. Uphaar Cinema was permitted to add 43 seats in the balcony and 57 seats in the main hall as per a notification, dated 30.09.1976. The cinema owners accordingly added the extra seats. However the Chief Fire Officer reported that the additional seats were a fire hazard. So the Lt. Governor cancelled the notification permitting extra seats and issued a new notification to this effect. The cinema owners went to the High Court and filed a writ petition. The Delhi High Court held that action taken was legal. The Court also held that simply by withdrawing the notification, it did not mean that all the additional seats were contrary to rules. The Court directed the administration to apply its mind afresh to the additional seats with a view to determine which of them had contravened which rule and to what extent. As a result of the addition of these seats, though the number of vertical gangways remained the same, the exit from the right hand side balcony was closed. Even the vertical gangway to the extreme right of the balcony along the wall was closed. A new vertical gangway was introduced between seat 8 & 9 on the right side of the balcony and the width of the gangway was reduced from 120 cm to 90 cm. There was absence of foot lights near the floor. As a result of the closure of exits, a patron sitting on the extreme right of the balcony had to come out from the left exit door and there was only one stairway available for him to go to the ground floor, to get out of the building. As per rules there should have been two stairways. From the foyer in the balcony, if one wanted to go to the right side stairway, he would come across a glass door, which used to remain closed. These deviations contributed to a large extent in obstructing smooth egress of patrons at the time of the fire which resulted in deaths in the balcony.

6. After the incident, the Lt. Governor instituted an inquiry headed by Naresh Kumar, Deputy Commissioner (South), Government of NCT. The High Court also appointed Commissioners to visit the site and note down the violations. This was done and the violations were found as under:

A. Basement Floor:

Four partition walls were constructed in the basement meant for parking; Inflammable materials were stored; A number of rooms were made in the basement. A temporary wooden structure was put up; Air conditioning plant room did not conform to regulations; Staircase leading to basement was not enclosed type.

B. Ground Floor:

Space meant for restaurant was let out for offices, banks etc ; Ticket booth was constructed near car parking , Partition walls between LT & HT transformers were altered ; A dispensary was constructed behind the transformer room over the ramp, One toilet adjoining the A/C duct was constructed; Cars were parked in front of the Transformer room ; Cycles and scooters were parked in front of the stairs.

C. First Floor:

Two additional refreshment counters were constructed in the rear stall foyer ; One additional seat was added in the rear most row near the left side exit door.

D. Mezzanine Floor:

One additional refreshment counter was constructed ; An air conditioning unit was installed in the area sanctioned for a washroom.

E. Second Floor (balcony):

52 additional seats were provided over and above the 250 originally sanctioned. When granting licence, DCP (Licensing) did not take sufficient care to facilitate free egress of patrons sitting on the right side ; Two gangways and one exit on the right side were closed ; Inspection room was converted into a 18 seater box; A toilet block was converted into an office.

F. Third Floor:

The sanctioned administrative area was converted an office complex using wooden partitions and let out to various companies ; A few offices were also constructed around the lift well with wooden floors and let out. Part of a sanctioned toilet block was also converted into an office.

G. Terrace:

Existing machine room was bigger in size than sanctioned.

7. Thiru. Naresh Kumar in his report observed that there were major deviations from the building bye laws which converted the whole building into a death-trap.

8. Electricity Act & Rules and Delhi Municipal Corporation Act Violations:

When Uphaar Cinema was being constructed, a transformer had to be installed by Delhi Vidyut Board. What was needed for a Cinema Hall was a transformer of 100 KW and a HT connection and so the owners had to provide space of 10.5 x 15 feet for housing it. While it was being processed, the Delhi Vidyut Board asked the owner to additionally provide land measuring over 45’ x 75’ for installing a sub-station, required for a colony developed by the Delhi Development Authority. Initially the owners refused, but ultimately gave in, owing to arm-twisting methods of the Vidyut Board. The Delhi Vidyut Board not only put up the sub-station on the ground floor in the car parking area, but the transformer meant for the theatre was also installed along with the same. A 500 KVA sub-station was put up and later augmented to 750 KVA and then to 1000 KVA. There are rules governing the installation of transformers, under the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act and the Indian Electricity Act. There are also detailed guidelines with regard to the installation of transformers under the Indian Electricity Act and Rules. One important rule in 50-A, which stipulates that in case of Multi-storey buildings of more than 15 meters height, the supplier/owner of the transformer shall provide at the point of commencement of supply, a suitable isolation device with cut-out or breaker to operate four wire circuit and fixed in a conspicuous position, 2.75 meters above ground level so as to completely isolate the power supply to the building in case of emergency. All conductors are required to be completely enclosed in a mechanically strong metal casting or metallic covering and adequately protected against mechanical damage. Before installation of a transformer, approval of the Electrical Inspector has to be obtained u/r 63. U/r 64 & 64-A. At the time of installation of the transformer, relays must be provided and cable trenches inside the sub station and switch station containing cables are to be filled with sand and pebbles and non-inflammable materials. All apparatus, cables and supply lines should be kept in a healthy condition and a record of all tests, checks and maintenance works are to be maintained. However in the case of Uphaar, the entire framework right from the installation to maintenance was defective and rules were breached. Neither circuit breakers, nor relays, nor earthing were provided. Approval was not taken before installation of 1000 KVA transformer and cable trenches were not provided. No maintenance schedule was maintained by the Vidyut Board nor were the mandatory and periodic tests carried out. There were no inspections between July 89 & 22.01.1997, when a foreman did an inspection. He noticed defects, which were brought to the notice of his superiors. The Delhi Vidyut Board was clearly negligent in the installation and maintenance of the transformer. Cable trenches were not of proper size and cables were over crowded without any cover. Electrical cables were found laid in a haphazard manner making it difficult to make out as to which cable was connected to which transformer. Arrangements were not made to prevent the flow of transformer oil from the sub station to the other parts of the building. The standards prescribed for such a power installation in the Indian Electricity Act & Rules & Bureau of Indian Standards, were not adhered to.

9. Sequence of Events:

Tracing the sequence of events on the fateful day, the Court held that on 13.06.1997, there was no electric supply to Uphaar between 3.55 PM and 4.55 PM. At about 4.57/4.58 when the power was restored, there was sparking in the transformer of the Delhi Vidyut Building which was observed by K.L. Malhotra, the Manager of the Cinema Hall. He reached the spot and tried to control it by throwing sand. Due to intense sparking, the socket of B-1 lead of B-Phase started melting and came out of the nut and bolt of the bus bar and fell on the radiator fin. As there was electric supply still in the cable, the sparking contained when it came in contact with the fins, leading to melting of the fin metal and thus creating a hole. Oil came gushing out of the hole and spread on the floor. Because the kerb at the entrance of the transformer was not of the approved height and the slope, oil came out from the transformer room into the parking lot. According to some eye witnesses, the oil was on fire. The burning oil came in contact with a car which caught fire. This fire came in contact with a few more cars, with the result that 27 cars burnt. The burning cars created a lot of smoke. Since the smoke had no other place to go and it has a tendency to go upward, it started going up through the stairway to the balcony foyer. Some of the smoke entered the hall. Patrons saw smoke coming from behind the screen. They thought that it was some special effect. When they realized that it was due to a fire, they reached the foyer and entered the balcony also. Those who left the balcony could not go out because of the dense smoke and so went into the toilet. Thus they got trapped in the balcony, foyer and in the toilets. Since the right side box had closed the exit that side, people came out from the left side. They had only one stairway to leave the building on the left side. They could not go to the stairway on the right because the path was blocked by a glass door. Hence, as time passed, the balcony became a gas chamber, resulting in suffocation. Most of the visitors who died of suffocation, died here. Some who managed to break the windowpanes in the foyer were rescued by the fire brigade. Emergency lights were not on and there was no public address system to guide the visitors. No assistance was provided by the officials of the Cinema Hall. The result of all this was that 59 people died due to asphyxiation and 103 were injured.

10. Compensation:

The Court ruled that any enterprise which is engaged in a hazardous or inherently dangerous industry, which poses a potential threat to the safety of the persons working in the premises or vicinity owes an absolute and non delegable duty to ensure that no harm results to anyone on account of hazardous or inherent nature of the activity undertaken. It should be held strictly liable for causing harm as part of the social cost of carrying on the hazardous activity. The Court went on to held that if the hazardous activity resulted in profit, the law must presume that the permission given to the enterprise to carry on the activity was conditional on it absorbing the cost of any accident on account of such activity. It must indemnify all those who suffer regardless of whether it has carried on carefully or not. The observation of the Supreme Court in MC Metha Vs Union of India, 1987 (1) SCC 395 are relevant and it holds an enterprise liable to compensate all those who are affected by the accident and such liability is not subject to any condition.

11. While going into the negligence and responsibility of the public authorities in the non compliance of the rules, Court held that the Delhi Vidyut Board was very negligent in regard to installation and maintenance of the transformers. The provisions of the Indian Electricity Act & Rules were not followed. The raising of the 3 feet parapet wall at the back of the transformer room in 1972 or early 1973 to the ceiling level was without obtaining the permission from the Municipal Corporation of Delhi. The Court faulted the Delhi Vidyut Board (DVB), the licensing authority, owners of the cinema and the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) for this wall and held them responsible and liable.

12. Regarding licensing authority, the Court held that, by his order dated 24.12.1979, 43 of the 56 additional seats added to the main hall in theatre were blocking the vertical gang ways. The 37 additional seats in the balcony were found to be in accordance with the rules, this despite the fact that they were blocking the exits and in contravention of the Cinematographic Rules, which prescribes clearly the number of exits for every hundred patrons. It is not only the number of exits, but also their location, which are important. The licensing authority did not care to move the Delhi High Court for obtaining appropriate directions, consequent on its earlier order. The Court held that most of the violations, which existed in the cinema hall due to which the licence was briefly suspended for four days in 1983 existed even on the date of the accident. Scant respect was shown to adherence to safety regulations. The authorities were not strict and vigilant in compliance of regulations meant for safety.

13. Delhi Fire Service:

The Delhi High Court then examined the role played by the Delhi Fire Service. An allegation was raised that they arrived late, did not do well and were more engaged in fire fighting than in rescue of the people and their equipments were out of order. The High Court noted that there might have been shortcoming in the kind of equipment provided to the Fire Service by the Government; however the staff of the Fire Brigade, with the available infrastructure, performed commendably. The court refused to give a ruling as to whether fire fighting or rescue should have been done first. It was not an expert on the matter and it is entirely for the fire fighting staff to decide in a situation as to how they have to meet it. The Court did not want to make any further comment.

14. The Court finally concluded that the licensee of Uphaar Cinema, the licensing branch of the Delhi Police, the Delhi Vidyut Board and the Municipal Corporation of Delhi were all responsible for having contributed to the spreading of fire and smoke and by their acts of omission and commission were are all jointly and severally liable to payment of compensation to the victims. There was no act of omission or commission on the part of the Delhi Fire Service. The Court held that the petitioner claming for damages in public law for wrongful acts done by the respondents is maintainable. Once the Court came to a conclusion that there was a breach of statutory duty on the part of some of the respondents and there was lack of proper care on the part of the others, it was sufficient to hold them liable for damages under the public law. Taking all this into account the High Court ordered the respondents to pay the one lakh to each of the persons injured in the accident by way of compensation for the mental pain, shock and agony. Regarding those who died, the Court arrived at a figure of Rs. 18 lakhs each to the relatives of the victims in case of adults and Rs.15 lakhs in case of children. The relatives will also be entitled to interest at 9% per annum from the date of filing petition, on the amount of compensation now allowed. Since the liability of each one of the respondents viz. Delhi Vidyut Board, Owners of cinema, Licensing Authority & Municipal Corporation of Delhi, was joint and several, the court apportioned the compensation amount payable by each. The owners of the cinema, who earned profit, were directed to pay compensation to the extent of 55%. The other respondents viz. Delhi Vidyut Board (DVB), Licensing authority & Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) were each liable to pay 15%.

15. Punitive Damages and other recommendations:

Besides the compensation amount, the Court also directed that the owners of the cinema would be liable to pay punitive damages to the extent of profit made by selling extra tickets to the seats illegally sanctioned by the authorities. It arrived at a figure of Rs. 2,50,00,000/- (Rupees Two crores fifty lakhs) being the income earned by selling 52 additional seats between 1979 and 1996, and held that the amount to the paid in this regard will be used for setting up a “Central Accident Trauma Service”. The Court also recommended the creation of a City Health Services on the lines of Delhi Fire Services consisting solely of medical, paramedical persons & Ambulances & equipment. It should be designed to provide medical assistance to the people in emergency situation. The Court suggested a legislation to provide for Public Liability Insurance for providing relief to victims of accident in public buildings. It also recommended the constitution of a Fire Safety Fund, which can be used to create safety awareness and in fire safety engineering. It further recommended upgradation and modernization of the Fire Service and fixed a time limit of 90 days to process the proposals of those Departments dealing in public safety. It observed that entertainment tax generated sufficient revenue, which can meet financial requirement of bodies, which are required to safe guard public health.


16. In Tamil Nadu, fortunately there has been no accident of the type at Uphaar in the recent past. But a far more grave tragedy had struck on 29.07.1979 at 4.30 P.M. in a touring cinema called Lakshmki Talkies situated in Lourdhammalpuram in Tuticorin. It was made of thatch and in a devastating fire on the fateful day 73 people died and 88 were injured. A Commission was appointed to go into the incident and make recommendations. Most of them have been implemented but how far are the cinema halls safe and how far are the safety norms being followed or violated is a moot point.

17. Inspection of Cinema Halls:

Government of Tamil Nadu have recently reviewed the system of periodic inspection of Cinema Halls. If inspections of such places are properly and periodically carried out, accidents can be prevented. In order to streamline the system of inspections and make them effective, Government of Tamil Nadu, vide GO Ms.No. 922, Home (Cinema.I) Department, dated 24.08.2000, constituted a multi-departmental committee headed by the Director of Fire Service, to undertake annual inspection of all Cinema Halls in the State. The committee would have representatives from Health, Chief Electricity Inspectorate, CMDA, Town & Country Planning Licensing Authority, PWD and Police. It would conduct joint inspection of Cinema Halls so that the defects are noticed then and there and the licensee is put on notice to rectify them. The licensing authority is also told about the state of affairs so that he too can step in appropriately. The Director of Fire & Rescue Services is also required to submit an annual report to Government in this regard.

18. Revision of the Cinemato-graphic Act and Rules:

Government of Tamil Nadu has also taken up an exercise of amending the Cinematographic Act & Rules, so that the specifications prescribed by the National Building Code, in so far as cinema halls are concerned, are incorporated in the Act itself. Cinematographic Act needs to be amended urgently so as to incorporate the latest technological development in the area of fire prevention, fire fighting and safety. The National Building Code is an official document, which prescribes different parameters for construction of different classes of buildings. All types of buildings are covered in the Code and it is the ‘Bible’ insofar as construction of buildings are concerned. It is in eight volumes of which Volume-IV pertains to Fire Safety. It is desirable that buildings are constructed in accordance with the provisions of this code.

19. Regarding the whole lot of other recommendations made by the Delhi High Court in the Uphaar judgement, including establishment of a Fire Safety Fund, Modernization of the Fire Service and Publicity and awareness campaigns, safety of buildings etc., Tamil Nadu Government has vide GO. 1102, Home (Pol.17) Department, dated 19.11.2002 established a high-powered commission with a retired High Court Judge (Justice -oOo-

Bhakthavatchalam) as its Chairman. I am a member of the Commission. The Commission has been given a 19 point term of reference which covers all issues that are important and relevant for fire prevention, fire fighting and fire safety. This Commission is perhaps the first of its kind in the country or even in the world and its findings will go a long way to address the issues involved. I understand that there is also a move to establish a similar Commission at the National Level.

20. Be as it may, the Delhi High Court judgment has sounded a wake-up call to all concerned. The judgment is indeed a landmark, having far reaching consequences. Hereafter the various agencies will have to pay hefty damages for lapses and failure to ensure safety. That is why the judgment has been examined in depth in this article. It is now time to wake up.


Sri Ramanathaswamy Temple This temple is constructed at the spot where Lord Rama offered woship to the sand Lingam - Ramanathaswamy made by Sita Devi & the Siva Lingam brought by Hanuman from the Kailasam - Viswa Lingam. The construction of the temple as it stands today, a wonderful example of Dravidian architecture, was started in the 12th century and ended in 19th century. All the rulers in a span of 350 years contributed greatly to various aspects and sections of the temple. The most interesting feature in the temple is the 1,220m long corridor with the beautiful carvings on the pillars, walls and cieling.

Kothandaramaswamy Temple The southern most tip of the island where the Indian Ocean mingles with the Bay of Bengal is Dhanushkodi. A major portion was washed away during the 1964 cyclone, but the Kothandaramaswamy temple here is still intact. According to legend, Vibeeshana the brother of Ravana met and joined hands with him at this spot. There are paintings in this temple depicting this story. The idols of Rama, Sita, Lakshmana can be seen along with Vibeeshana & Hanuman. Vivekanadar is said to have landed here after his historic trip to spread Hinduism in the West.




R.K. Sharma surrenders in Ambala court

By Our Special Correspondent

The prime accused in the Shivani Bhatnagar murder case, R.K. Sharma, outside the court in Ambala on Friday, after he surrendered. — PTI
Saath mein baap kata hua kaun hai -carlos?

Gulshan Kumar murder case

24 Apr 2002, 1625 hrs IST,PTI

mumbai: following is the chronology of events in the gulshan kumar murder case. august 12, 1997 : gulshan kumar is shot dead at jeet nagar in juhu. august 30, 1997 : mumbai police commissioner r h mendonca declares that music composer nadeem akhtar saifee is the prime conspirator. police allege that nadeem had hired the killers. october 6, 1997 : the owner of tips cassettes, ramesh taurani, is arrested on charges of abetting the crime. police allege he paid rs 25 lakh to gulshan kumar's killers. november 28, 1997 : police file a 400-page chargesheet, accusing 26 people of conspiring to kill gulshan kumar. fifteen of them are arrested. of these, mohammed ali shaikh turns approver. september 9, 1998 : accused shafi ahmed, alias shafi mamu, is arrested. police allege he sent the killers to dubai to meet contract killer abu salem. he is also charged with giving pagers and mobile phones to the killers. september 5, 1999 : thane rural police arrest two more people accused in the case: rasheed daud merchant (alleged assassin) and fatima daud merchant in uttar pradesh. september 21, 1999 : hearing an extradition case filed by the government of india against nadeem, bow street magistrate in london rules that there is prima facie case against nadeem and recommends his extradition december 21, 2000 : the london high court rejects the government of india's plea to extradite nadeem. he is discharged from the case. the court also passes strictures against the police, saying the evidence is tainted. january 8, 2001 : abdul rauf daud merchant (another alleged assassin) is arrested in kolkata. april 27, 2001 : shafi ahmed is the first accused to be discharged in the case. prosecution concedes there is no evidence against him. april 30, 2001 : charges are framed against 17 accused. one of the accused pratap singh shaukin is discharged due to lack of evidence. shaukin was accused of helping the killers escape. he allegedly took them from mumbra in nearby thane to nasik in his tempo. june 18, 2001 : trial begins. ramchandra lavangare, an eyewitness, identifies the alleged assassins — abdul rashid daud and abdul rauf daud merchant — in the court. june 20, 2001 : another eye witness sahibrao fuke identifies the alleged killers in the court of justice m l tahilyani. june 27, 2001 : keki balsara, key to the prosecution's case against nadeem, is found dead in the washroom of the city police headquarters. january 8, 2002 : approver mohammed ali shaikh refuses to identify the alleged killers in court. he says he did not know nadeem. he is declared hostile, and pardon granted to him is withdrawn. january 10, 2002 : ten of the accused are granted bail after prosecution says it would not produce any new evidence against them. april 16, 2002 : prosecution accepts there is no evidence against 15 of the 19 people accused in the case. april 23, 2002 : the sessions court rejects the conspiracy charge levelled by the prosecution against the accused. april 24, 2002 : 18 of the 19 accused are acquitted. one is found guilty. related stories

Funeral of Gulshan Kumar
The killing sent shockwaves through Bollywood

By the BBC's Tanuja Solanki

A prominent Indian music director has won his appeal at the High Court in London to avoid extradition to India on a murder charge.

Nadeem Akhtar Saifi had been charged by Indian police with murdering the Indian music producer, Gulshan Kumar, in Bombay in 1997.

Nadeem Saifi
Nadeem Saifi: Said he would not get fair trial
The murder sent shockwaves throughout the Indian music industry, and brought to the surface the numerous extortion rackets associated with the huge film business in Bombay, known as Bollywood.

Nadeem Akhtar Saifi's lawyer had previously told the High Court that Mr Saifi had been implicated in the murder of Gulshan Kumar two months after he and his wife came to Britain.

Mr Saifi had apparently intended to return to India, but changed his mind due to serious doubts about the genuineness of the proceedings against him

He also feared that as a Muslim he would not get a fair trial in India.

His defence team had asked the two High Court judges to block his extradition on the grounds that false evidence against him had been obtained through what was described as "inhuman treatment and coercion" of a key witness by the Indian police.

Retracted confession

Today, the judges ruled that the accusation of murder and conspiracy made against Nadeem Akhtar Saifi had not been made in good faith and in the interests of justice.

One of the sitting judges, Lord Justice Rose, told the court that it would not be fair and just to return the applicant to India because of the apparent misbehaviour by the police in pursuing their inquiries.

The case for the prosecution had rested on the evidence of Mohammed Ali Shaikh, who confessed to being part of the murder conspiracy and implicated Mr Saifi as co-conspirator before a magistrate in Bombay.

But according to Mr Saifi's lawyers, Mr Ali Shaikh later retracted his confession saying it had been obtained through police coercion.

No comments: