Bombay High Court took cognizance and issued notice in a vaccine murder case of Dr. Snehal Lunawat where interim compensation of Rs. 1000 crores ($ 126 million approx.) is sought.
Advocate for Bill Gates appeared before the High Court and accepted the notice from High Court.
Central Government has given the Enquiry Report certificate that the death of Dr. Snehal Lunawat was due to side effects of covishield vaccine.
Petition also prays for action against social media like Facebook, YouTube, Google and main stream media who are running false narrative & conspiracy theories that vaccines are completely safe and are suppressing the news and information regarding side effects,inefficacy or failure of vaccines.
Notice is also issued to Dr. V. G. Somani – Drug Controller General of India and Dr. Randeep Guleria, the former Director of AIIMS who wererunning the false narratives that vaccines are completely safe.
Supreme Court also issued notice to Central Government in vaccine deaths of two children from Hyderabad &Tamilnadu.
Kerala High Court also asked Central Government to file reply affidavit in vaccine death of Nova Sabu& others.
Central Government has informed the High Court that they are formulating guidelines for giving compensation to victims of vaccine side effectsand resultant deaths.
1) Division Bench of Bombay High Court Comprising Justice Gangapurwala & Justice Madhav Jamdar had took cognizanceon 26.08.2022of the petition filed by Shri Dilip Lunawat, who is the father of deceased Dr. Snehal Lunawat, who passed away due to side effects of covishield vaccine. [Writ Petition No. 5767 of 2022 Dilip Lunawat Vs. Serum Institute of India Pvt. Ltd. &Ors.]
(i) Serum Institute’s CEO Adar Poonawalla (Respondent No. 1)
(ii) Bill Gates– Partner in the covishield vaccine (Respondent No. 2)
(iii) Union of India (Respondent No. 3)
(iv) State of Maharashtra (Respondent No. 4)
(v) Ministry of Health & Family Welfare (Respondent No. 5)
(vi) Drug Controller General of India (Respondent No. 6)
(vii)Dr. V.G. Somani – Drug Controller General (Respondent No. 7)
(viii)Dr. RandeepGuleria,Former Director of AIIMS (Respondent No.
3) The prayers in the petition read thus;
The Petitioner therefore prays that, this Hon’ble Court may pleased to:
i) To hold that, the petitioner’s daughter was given vaccine under deception, and false narratives by the state authorities that the vaccines are completely safe and if any serious or severe side effects occurs then the state authorities have define treatment, however when she suffered serious side effects then there was no treatment available and lastly she died due to side effects of vaccines as has been confirmed by the Government of India’s AEFI Committee, therefore state authorities are responsible for causing her death by spreading false narratives and therefore, they are bound to compensate the petitioner in view of law laid by Hon’ble Supreme Court and Hon’ble High Courts and more particularly in the case of Registrar General, High Court of Meghalaya Vs. State of Meghalaya 2021 SCC OnLineMegh 130;
ii)To hold that the respondent state authorities are having callous criminal attitude as till date they have not changed their frequently asked questions and even on 12.2021 they are continuing their false narratives that they are having definite treatment for any side effects of vaccines;
iii) To hold that as per law laid down by the Constitution Bench of Hon’ble Supreme Court in Anita Khushwha’s case (2016) 8 SCC 509, the value of life of Indian citizen is not less than that of any person across the world either of America or of any country and therefore the Petitioner is entitled to the compensation in proportion to the compensation granted in other similar cases in United State, Singapore etc.
iv) To hold that, in view of factual and legal position mentioned in the petition, the petitioner is entitled for an interim compensation of Rs. 1000 Crores as a deterrence to guilty and as succor to petitioner’s family for loss of life of petitioner’s daughter due to deliberate act of commission and omission on the part of respondents, with a liberty to the state authorities to recover it from the responsible officials and Serum Institute, Pune who is the manufacturer of Covishield Vaccine, as per law & ratio laid down inVeena Sippy Vs. Mr. Narayan Dumbre&Ors. 2012 SCC OnLineBom 339;
v) Direct appropriate action by the Respondent No. 3 Union of India against all including main stream and social media like Google, YouTube, facebook etc. who are involved in the conspiracy of suppressing the correct data about death causing and other serious vaccine injuries and spreading false, misleading and one sided data to deprive the citizen to take informed decision and compel them to take vaccines;
vi) Direct the state authorities to take proper steps to stop further deaths of citizen and to publish the side effects of vaccines by following the rules of Universal Declaration on Bioethics & Human Rights, 200and as per law laid down in Master Haridan Kumar Vs. UOI 2019 SCC online Del 11929and also as recently done by the Government of Japan;
vii) Declare that, the Petitioner’s daughter Dr. SnehalLunawat and other doctors as a Martyr who were given Covid vaccines through deception and coercion and who died due to side effects of vaccines.
viii) Open a dedicated research institute in India under the name of Dr. SnehalLunawat.
ix) Pass any other order which this Hon’ble Court maydeems fit and proper in the fact and circumstances of the case.”
4) When the matter came up for hearing, the Counsel for Petitioner, Adv. Nilesh Ojha, pointed out to the Court the developments after filing of the said petition that the Central Government has admitted for providing compensation.
5) The High Court found the petition worth its consideration and ordered issuance of notice.
The Order dated 26.08.2022 reads thus;
“1. Issue notice to the Respondents, returnable on 17th November 2022. Hamdast allowed.
2. AGP accepts notice for Respondent No.4. The learned Counsel accepts notice for Respondent No.2.”
6) Mr. Lunawat has stated in his plea that health workers like his daughter were compelled to take vaccine due to the false narratives created by Drug Controller General of India (DCGI) and Director of All India Institute of Medical Science (AIIMS) that vaccines are safe, a narrative which was endorsed by State authorities as well, without verification.
He stated that his daughter took the vaccine on January 28, 2021 and due to the side effects of the vaccine, she passed away on March 1, 2021.
Pertinently, Mr. Lunawat contended that the Central government’s AEFI committee on October 2, 2021 admitted that the death of his daughter was due to side effects of Covishield vaccine.
“This petition is being filed to give justice to my daughter and in order to save the life of many more people who are likely to be murdered due to such unlawful activities of Respondent authorities,” the plea stated.
9) On 10.08.2022, Kerala High Court in the case of Sayeeda Vs Union of India in WP (C) No. 17628 of 2022 has issued directions to the Central Government to immediately formulate guidelines for giving compensation to the victims of deaths or other side effects of vaccines.
10) On August 10 2022, the central government submitted before Kerala High Court that they are in process of formulating policies to provide monetary compensation to victims of side effects of these vaccines.
The matter came before Kerala High Court. The Court observed;
“This is a national calamity which we faced. Of course, I do understand the case is very genuine and it has to be dealt with. As far as the Central government is concerned, similar issues are cropping up in other states also. There has to be an effort to formulate a proper guideline, a proper scheme for compensating these persons and that is being done. Let them bring on record what steps have been taken so that I can pass a reasoned and considered order, rather than an order in vacuum. It is not a laughing matter, I consider it to be very serious“, he orally observed.”
The Court acknowledged the seriousness of the petitioners’ submission that the process has to be hastened since the family members of the victims are facing extreme difficulties consequent to the death of the earning member of the family.
“I find the apprehension expressed by the learned counsel to be well founded. The situation requires urgent action on the part of the National Disaster Management Authority“, the Court said in its order.”.
11) Due to deaths caused by covishield a.k.a Astrazeneca globally, around 18 European Countries have banned these vaccines.
12)The first petition for vaccine murder was filed before the Bombay High court by Smt. Kiran Yadav for claiming compensation of Rs. 100 crores($ 12.6 million approx.) for death of her son Hitesh Kadve. She has also sought criminal prosecution of Bill Gates & others. This case was widely discussed across the globe due to the serious side effects of covishield. (Smt. Kiran Yadav vs. The State of Maharashtra &Ors. Cri. WP No. 6159 of 2021)
13)Summary of worldwide cases of compensation claims by victims of side effects of Corona Vaccine:-
13.1. Source: Biotech express Magazine
Compensation suits are not only restricted to India. In Taiwan, a panel of experts appointed by the Ministry of Health and Welfare agreed that the government should pay NT$6 million (US$209,025) in the case of a woman, whose deathis the first to be classified as directly related to receiving a COVID-19 vaccine shot in Taiwan. Because the woman did not have any chronic ailments, nor other conditions that could explain a very rare blood-clotting disorder called “thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome,” a known side effect of the AstraZeneca vaccine she received, the panel determined that her death was linked to the vaccine, Chuang said. The woman was a Taipei resident in her 50s, who was identified only by her surname Yu. She died of a brain hemorrhage, a complication caused by the syndrome, according to the panel’s findings. https://focustaiwan.tw/society/202203290026
13.3.In UK, up to 920 compensation applications have been filed by people who were left seriously injured after getting the Covid-19 vaccine as claims could hit £110 million. Vikki Spit, from Alston, Cumbria, hopes to qualify for financial support after her fiancé Zion, 48, died of a brain hemorrhage two weeks after getting the AstraZeneca vaccine in May 2021. She claimed his death certificate named the AstraZeneca vaccine but said she has been left in ‘limbo’ after applying for the scheme in June.
Thailand Government till now gave 1.71 Billion baht (around Rs. 400 Crores) to 14,034 people as a compensation for side effects of Corona Vaccine. Of these, 3670 people were compensated for death due to Covid-19 vaccine.
In a case of side effects of vaccines, the United States Government has set up the ‘National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program’. In a case of side effects of MMR vaccines, the court granted a settlement of 101 Million U.S Dollars (Rs. 805 crores).
The companies’ failure to report certain safety data was also taken into consideration. The investigating agency of US on its own investigated and recovered an amount 10.2 Billion U.S.,around 812crore Rupees. The excerpts from the news published on July 2, 2012 in The United State’ Department of Justice:
15.GLAXOSMITHKLINE TO PLEAD GUILTY AND PAY $3 BILLION TO RESOLVE FRAUD ALLEGATIONS AND FAILURE TO REPORT SAFETY DATA
15.1. Largest Health Care Fraud Settlement in U.S. History
“1. The United States alleges that GSK stated that Avandia had a positive cholesterol profile despite having no well-controlled studies to support that message.The United States also alleges that the company sponsored programs suggesting cardiovascular benefits from Avandia therapy despite warnings on the FDA- approved label regarding cardiovascular risks. GSK has agreed to pay $657 million relating to false claims arising from misrepresentations about Avandia. The federal share of this settlement is $508 million and the state share is $149 million.
In addition to the criminal and civil resolutions, GSK has executed a five-year Corporate Integrity Agreement (CIA) with the Department of Health and Human Services, Office of Inspector General (HHS-OIG). The plea agreement and CIA include novel provisions that require that GSK implement and/or maintain major changes to the way it does business, including changing the way its sales force is compensated to remove compensation based on sales goals for territories, one of the driving forces behind much of the conduct at issue in this matter. Under the CIA, GSK is required to change its executive compensation program to permit the company to recoup annual bonuses and long-term incentives from covered executives if they, or their subordinates, engage in significant misconduct. GSK may recoup monies from executives who are current employees and those who have left the company. Among other things, the CIA also requires GSK to implement and maintain transparency in its research practices and publication policies and to follow specified policies in its contracts with various health care payors.
Federal employees deserve health care providers and suppliers, including drug manufacturers, that meet the highest standards of ethical and professional behavior,” said Patrick E. McFarland, Inspector General of the U.S. Office of Personnel Management.
Assistant Director of the FBI’s Criminal, Cyber, Response and Services Branch. “Together, we will continue to bring to justice those engaged in illegal schemes that threaten the safety of prescription drugs and other critical elements of our nation’s healthcare system.
This matter was investigated by agents from the HHS-OIG; the FDA’s Office of Criminal Investigations; the Defense Criminal Investigative Service of the Department of Defense; the Office of the Inspector General for the Office of Personnel Management; the Department of Veterans Affairs; the Department of Labor; TRICARE Program Integrity; the Office of Inspector General for the U.S. Postal Service and the FBI.
This resolution is part of the government’s emphasis on combating health care fraud and another step for the Health Care Fraud Prevention and Enforcement Action Team (HEAT) initiative, which was announced in May 2009 by Attorney General Eric Holder and Kathleen Sebelius, Secretary of HHS. The partnership between the two departments has focused efforts to reduce and prevent Medicare and Medicaid financial fraud through enhanced cooperation. Over the last three years, the department has recovered a total of more than $10.2 billion in settlements, judgments, fines, restitution, and forfeiture in health care fraud matters pursued under the False Claims Act and the Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act.
The company’s unlawful promotion of certain prescription drugs, its failure to report certain safety data, and its civil liability for alleged false price reporting practices.
GSK did not make available data from two other studies in which Paxil also failed to demonstrate efficacy in treating depression in patients under 18. The United States further alleges that GSK sponsored dinner programs, lunch programs, spa programs and similar activities to promote the use of Paxil in children and adolescents. GSK paid a speaker to talk to an audience of doctors and paid for the meal or spa treatment for the doctors who attended.
Between 2001 and 2007, GSK failed to include certain safety data about Avandia, a diabetes drug.
The missing information included data regarding certain post- marketing studies, as well as data regarding two studies undertaken in response to European regulators’ concerns about the cardiovascular safety of Avandia. Since 2007, the FDA has added two black box warnings to the Avandia label to alert physicians about the potential increased risk of (1) congestive heart failure, and (2) myocardial infarction (heart attack).
GSK has agreed to plead guilty to failing to report data to the FDA and has agreed to pay a criminal fine in the amount of $242,612,800 for its unlawful conduct concerning Avandia.
It also includes allegations that GSK paid kickbacks to health care professionals to induce them to promote and prescribe these drugs as well as the drugs Imitrex, Lotronex, Flovent and Valtrex. The United States alleges that this conduct caused false claims to be submitted to federal health care programs.
GSK has agreed to pay $1.043 billion relating to false claims arising from this alleged conduct. The federal share of this settlement is $832 million and the state share is $210 million.”
GRAND VICTORY FOR IBA AND AIM IN STUDENTS’ VACCINATION CASE
Maharashtra State Education Department’s Dy. Director issues circular on February 14, 2022 to the effect that:
Vaccine is not mandatory for students
The children and their parents must be informed about the fatal and other side effects of vaccines
Obtaining a written consent/permission from parents is a must before vaccinating students
No requirement of vaccination as a prerequisite to appear for exams
The Deputy Director of Education (Maharashtra State) Shri. Deepak Chavne, after his meeting with Awaken India Movement (AIM) team and after going through all the documents including IBA’s Notice, case laws and RTI Reply, has issued a new circular on 14th February, 2022 asking all the Divisional Directors of Education and all Education officers of Zilla Parishad, not to force any student to get vaccinated. It is further intimated that every student and his/her parent must be informed about every aspect regarding the vaccine (which includes death causing and other side effects) and students can be vaccinated only after getting written permission from parents. A copy of said letter is also marked to Dr. Sachin Pethkar, AIM, Pune.
As per Central Government’s Covid-19 Guidelines, Covid vaccination is voluntary and not compulsory. Secondly, it is mandatory to inform about the side effects of vaccines including the fatal side effects, to students and their parents before they are asked to get vaccinated. Only after getting a written consent from parents, the respective students can be vaccinated.
Hon’ble Supreme Court in Noida Entrepreneurs Vs. Noida (2011) 6 SCC 527 has made it clear that, if anything is prohibited then it cannot be done indirectly. It means that vaccination cannot be a condition for appearing for an exam or to avail any services or benefits, when it is not mandatory.The law is very well settled in Registrar General High Court of Meghalaya Vs. State of Meghalaya (2021 SCC Online Megh 130).
If any person or student is vaccinated without being informed of its side effects or if anyone is compelled to take vaccine under pressure by setting it as a condition to appear for exams or for availing any other services or benefits, then such officers will be guilty of violating fundamental rights of the citizen and also be guilty of committing criminal offences.
Such guilty officers, principal, school teacher, employer etc. will be liable to pay compensation to the victim and they will also be liable to be punished under section 420, 409, 115, 323, 336, 120(B), 109, 34 etc. of Indian Penal Code.
If any person taking vaccine dies, then such accused officials, Principal etc. will be liable for action under section 302,304-A, 120(B), 34, 109 etc. of Indian Penal Code. Section 302 is an offence of murder and has punishment up to death penalty or life imprisonment.
Download Related Documents :-
Please click here to download the copy of circular passed by Maharashtra State Education Department on February 14, 2022:
Kin of doctor who died after her first dose of Covishield files Writ Petition before Bombay High Court, claims Rs.10,000 crores compensation (USD 1.34 billion)
The deceased doctor’s father has filed Rs. 10,000 crore compensation Writ against State Government of Maharashtra and Serum Institute of India’s (SII) Adar Poonawalla and his Partner Bill Gates.
Government has admitted that Dr. Snehal Lunawat died due to side effects of Covishield vaccine.
Around 12,000 people have died due to side effects of corona vaccines
Around 18 European countries have banned Covishield (aka Astrazeneca) for its fatal side effects.
WHO has also warned against Guillain Barre Syndrome (GBS) – a rare neurological disorder caused due to Covishield.
Canadian Government has also warned against side effects of covishield
Already one petition is pending in the Bombay High Court where a mother has filed a petition to prosecute Bill Gates, Adar Poonawalla & Government officials involved in murder of her 23 year old son who died due to side effects of CoviShield vaccine.
The deceased’s mother has also claimed a compensation of Rs. 1000 crores and prosecution under section 52, 115, 302, 409, 120(B), 420, 34, 109 of I.P.C.
Mumbai: Vaccine Syndicate Kingpin and toxic philanthropist Bill Gates is once again slapped with a new case before Bombay High Court.
The Petition (WPST 2739/2022) is filed by Shri. Dilip Lunawat, father of Dr. Snehal Lunawat, who was compelled to take Covishield vaccine by deception.
The Respondents in this Writ Petition are:
Mr. Adar C. Poonawalla – CEO Serum Institute of India Pvt. Ltd.
Union of India
State of Maharashtra
Ministry of Health & Family Welfare
Drug Controller General of India
V.G. Somani – Drug Controller General of India
Dr. Randeep Guleria -Director, AIIMS, New Delhi
Dr. Snehal Lunawat and others were cheated due to misrepresentation by the Government Authorities that vaccines are completely safe and should there be any side effect, the state claims to have an assured treatment for such side effects.
The FAQs issued by the State of Maharashtra continue to reiterate the said false narratives as under:
Question No. 16 in FAQs reads thus;
“What are the common side effects that I can expect after Vaccination?
Fever, headaches, body aches, fatigue, injection site pain are the common side effects, and they are manageable by a short course of Paracetamol. Most resolve by 2-3 days. You are observed for 30 minutes after receiving the dose, for any serious or severe effects, and even though they are rare to occur, there is definite treatment for each such serious effect.”
(Refer para 8 of the Petition for details)
After getting the covishield vaccine, Dr. Snehal Lunawat experienced severe side effects. However,no treatment was available with the Government or with the company i.e. Serum Institute and she died due to ‘blood clotting’. After the enquiry, the Government of India’s AEFI (Adverse Event Following Immunisation) Committee has admitted that her death was due to side effects of vaccine.
The prayers of the Writ Petition read thus;
“The Petitioner therefore prays that, this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to:
i.To hold that, the petitioner’s daughter was given vaccine under deception, and false narratives by the state authorities that the vaccines are completely safe and if any serious or severe side effects occurs then the state authorities have define treatment, however when she suffered serious side effects then there was no treatment available and lastly she died due to side effects of vaccines as has been confirmed by the Government of India’s AEFI Committee, therefore state authorities are responsible for causing her death by spreading false narratives and therefore, they are bound to compensate the petitioner in view of law laid by Hon’ble Supreme Court and Hon’ble High Courts and more particularly in the case of Registrar General, High Court of Meghalaya Vs. State of Meghalaya 2021 SCC OnLineMegh 130;
ii) To hold that the respondent state authorities are having callous criminal attitude as till date they have not changed their frequently asked questions and even on 12.2021 they are continuing their false narratives that they are having definite treatment for any side effects of vaccines;
iii)To hold that as per law laid down by the Constitution Bench of Hon’ble Supreme Court in Anita Khushwha’s case (2016) 8 SCC 509, the value of life of Indian citizen is not less than that of any person across the world either of America or of any country and therefore the Petitioner is entitled to the compensation in proportion to the compensation granted in other similar cases in United State, Singapore etc.
iv) To hold that, in view of factual and legal position mentioned in the petition, the petitioner is entitled for an interim compensation of Rs. 1000 Crores as a deterrence to guilty and as succor to petitioner’s family for loss of life of petitioner’s daughter due to deliberate act of commission and omission on the part of respondents, with a liberty to the state authorities to recover it from the responsible officials and Serum Institute, Pune who is the manufacturer of Covishield Vaccine, as per law & ratio laid down in Veena Sippy Vs. Mr. Narayan Dumbre&Ors. 2012 SCC OnLineBom 339;
v.) Direct appropriate action by the Respondent No. 3 Union of India against all, including main stream and social media like Google, YouTube, Facebook etc. who are involved in the conspiracy of suppressing the correct data about death causing and other serious vaccine injuries and spreading false, misleading and one sided data to deprive the citizes to take informed decision and compel them to take vaccines;
vi) Direct the state authorities to take proper steps to stop further deaths of citizens and to publish the side effects of vaccines by following the rules of Universal Declaration on Bioethics & Human Rights, 2005 and as per law laid down in Master Haridan Kumar Vs. UOI 2019 SCC online Del 11929 and also as recently done by the Government of Japan;
vii) Declare that, the Petitioner’s daughter Dr. Snehal Lunawat and other doctors as a Martyr who were given Covid vaccines through deception and coercion and who died due to side effects of vaccines.
viii) Open a dedicated research institute in India under the name of Dr. Snehal Lunawat.
ix) Pass any other order which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the fact and circumstances of the case.”
The Petitioner has relied on several cases including the case of Pharma company GlaxoSmithKline who was made to pay 10.2 billion US dollars (around Rs. 7,475 crores) for committing various offences including suppression of side effects of the medicines and putting the life of Americans in danger
With regards to criminal prosecution of the accused, para 13 of the Petition reads as under:
“So far as the prosecution of accused is concerned, it is made clear that the Awaken India Movement has taken the cause for punishing the guilty and therefore the petitioner is not making the said prayers in the petition.”
It is informed by Awaken India Movement (www.awakenindiamovement.com) that they are filing a criminal case shortly, for murder charges and demanding death penalty for all accused.
At last,after 5 months the PMO orders Health Ministry to take action on the complaint petition against Bill Gates and officials of Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR) filed by Secretary General of Human Rights Security Council
1.The Under Secretary of Government of India, Shri. Sanjay Kumar Chaurasia in his letter dated 29.12.2021 has written to the Secretary, Ministry of Health & Family Welfare, North Block, New Delhi thus;
“Subject: A self-explanatory representation – regarding.
The undersigned is directed to forward herewith a copy of following petition for action as appropriate:
Details of petition
Brief of the petition
Registration No. PMOPG/D/2021/0208618 Dated 02.09.2021 received from Shri M.A Shaikh, R/o 4 Gauri Compound Near GoraiKhadi LT Road Borivali, Mumbai, Maharashtra.
Petitioner has requested for CBI investigation against the against the accused person for death of 8 female childrenas detailed/mentioned in the petition.
2.The complaint petition dated 02.09.2021 was registered with the Prime Minister office as PMOPG/D/2021/0208618.
The prayers in the petition were as under;
“(i). Immediate direction for implementation of Parliamentary Committee’s 72nd Report and recommendations of investigation and prosecution of office bearers of ‘toxic philanthropist’ and Vaccine Syndicate’s Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and the concerned officials of Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR) responsible for death of 8 female children because of unauthorized, unlawful & unapproved vaccines;
(ii). Immediate direction to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) for registration of First Information Report (FIR) for investigation and strict action under sections 115, 109, 302, 307, 304, 419, 420, 471, 474, 188, 505, r/w 120 (B) & 34 of IPC& sections of Disaster Management Act 2005 and other provisions of the special acts against all the anti-national, anti-humanity elements, bio terrorists, ‘Pharma Syndicates’, ‘Tech Syndicates’ and ‘Tech Bullies’, who are involved in offences against entire humanity which are genocide (Mass Murders) of the citizens, caused by their acts of commission and omission related to Covid-19 pandemic as detailed in the draft charges given in the present complaint.
(iii). Immediate direction to concerned Authorities;
i) To issue Lookout Notices/Lookout Circulars (LOC) and arrest warrants against the accused whose involvement is ex-facie proved; ii) To initiate action for attachment of movable and immovable properties of all of the accused and their companies;
iii) To commence custodial interrogation of the accused; iv) To conduct a Lie –Detector Test, Brain Mapping Test, Narco Analysis test of all the prime accused such as Dr. Soumya Swaminathan, Dr. RandeepGuleria, Mr. Arvind Kejriwal Dr. Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, Dr. Anthony Fauci, Bill Gates, Mark Zuckerberg, Jack Dorsey and others, on the grounds explained in this Representation-cum-Complaint.
(iv). Immediate direction to all the authorities to;
(i) Seriously consider the American Frontline Doctors (AFLDS) White Paper on Covid-19 and experimental vaccine candidates.
(ii) To not to force anyone for vaccination and strictly abide by the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court and various High Courts regarding the fundamental right of each citizen to his/her choice of treatment.
(iii) To inform the public about real dangers of the vaccine.
(iv) To inform the public about other proven, safe and more effective medicines.
(v) To not to spread fear about any further wave without verifying science evidence.
(v). Appropriate Direction as per the Report submitted by the Expert Committee to the office of Hon’ble Prime Minister with recommendations to not to administer vaccines on persons who have recovered from Covid-19 infection and have antibodies developed within their bodies.
(vi). Immediate direction for providing protection to all the Whistle-blowers and their witnesses who have already exposed and continue to expose the Syndicate comprising of BIG PHARMA, BIG TECH and BIG SCIENCE.
(vii). Direction for constituting separate enquiry committee regarding the timing of sudden waning of panic around the second corona wave in India which was fuelled by incessant reporting in media over shortage of oxygen and this panic and how & why the said hype got vanished after the investigation in ‘Tool Kit’ was commenced by the Delhi Police.”
3.After much deliberations and consultations, finally thePrime Ministerhas directed his Under Secretary to forward the grievance to Health Ministry with specific instruction for appropriate action.
4.In his 132-page complaint (refer all the documents below), the complainant has provided all proofs of the crimes committed by the Vaccine Syndicate headed probably by Bill Gates.
5.In another case of unauthorized experimental trials of HPV vaccines causing death of 8 female children, the Parliamentary committee of India has already recommended investigation and prosecution against various persons including office bearers of Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (BMGF).
6.The said report is already held to be legally admissible evidence by the Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court of India in Kalpana Mehta’s case(2018) 7 SCC1.
7.The complainant has also arraigned Mark Zuckerberg of Facebook, Mr. Jack Dorsey of Twitter and officials of Google, YouTube etc.
8.The complaint also urges for providing immediate protection to all the Whistle blowers and their witnesses who have already exposed and continue to expose the Vaccine Syndicate comprising of Big Pharma, Big Tech and Big Science.
9.The Complainant has requested Indian Bar Association to represent his case before all forums and to take it to its logical conclusion.
10.The Indian Bar Association has already taken legal action against the World Health Organization’s (WHO) Chief Scientist Dr. Soumya Swaminathan for her role in spreading disinformation and suppressing data on the use of Ivermectin to treat COVID-19.
11.The complainant has relied on following important evidences:
Parliamentary Committee’s 72nd
Audit Report of committee appointed by the Supreme Court of India.
Effects of ongoing investigation by Delhi Police regarding ‘Corona Toolkit’.
Anthony Fauci’s Covid-19 Dossier prepared by Dr. David E. Martin.
America’s Frontline Doctors White Paper on Covid-19 Experimental Vaccine Candidate.
Scientific Data given by Front Line Critical COVID-19 Care Alliance (FLCCC), British Ivermectin Recommendation Development Panel (BIRD), Research Square.
Earlier attempts by Bill Gates to kill Children in Polio doses explained in an article by GreatGameIndia.
Earlier attempts of false pandemic of Swine Flu by officials of WHOand European Unions enquiry on it.
Data provided by the volunteers of Awaken India Movement and many other authentic and scientific data and related articles.
12. MAIN CHARGE AGAINST ALL THE ACCUSED.
12.1.On the basis of materials, evidence and proofs of sterling nature the accused are liable to answer the following charge which is ex-facie proved.
12.2.The main accused Bill Gates and his allies of GAVI (Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunizations) hatched a conspiracy to create a fix market for their vaccines and other drugs and in said conspiracy they joined other accused;
i) Bill Gates
i) Anthony Fauci, Chief Medical Advisor to the President of US
ii) Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, Director-General of the World Health Organization
iii) Dr. Soumya Swaminathan, Chief Scientist at the World Health Organization
iv) Mark Zuckerberg, Chief Executive Officer of Facebook
v) Jack Dorsey, Chief Executive Officer of Twitter.
vi) Steve Chen, Chad Hurley, and Jawed Karim, YouTube (Google).
vii) Arvind Kejriwal, Chief Minister, Delhi
vii) Many others as mentioned in Annexure-T13 and many other who which can be joined after thorough investigation.
12.3.In furtherance of said conspiracies they committed overt acts and following acts of commission and omission:
i) Created fake data.
ii) Suppressed and dishonestly concealed the actual data.
iii)Twisted the material facts.
iv) Created narratives and conspiracy theories.
v) Prepared policies of YouTube, Twitter, Facebook etc. to suppress and stop the truth and real information reaching.
vi) Removed the original and scientific information from platforms like YouTube, Twitter and others on the basis of bogus policies which are against the scientific data.
vii) Published bogus and sponsored ‘fact checks’ to counter the truth and to create confusion in the mind of common public and to discourage the people, Scientists and Doctors who possess scientific data.
viii) Managed to take control of Government Health Agencies of many countries to get the policies and rules framed to suit their ulterior purposes.
ix) Allowed the people to die but insured that, people should not get the easily available, safe and affordable medicine such as Ivermectin, Hydroxychloroquine, Vitamin D3 and Ayurvedic, Naturopathic treatments.
x) This was done to create fear in the minds of people so that the vaccine can be portrayed as the only alternative to save their lives and this would pave the way for easy Emergency Use of Authorization (EUA) of unapproved vaccines.
xi) The dangerous effects of vaccine were suppressed and the accused managed many ‘media houses’ who covered it up.
xii) The inefficiency of vaccines and death of many people and many doctors even after getting two doses of vaccines were twisted, concealed, suppressed and people were misguided with the help of straw man fallacies.
xiii) The deaths due to vaccines were underreported by creating rules suitable to them.
xiv) They tried to counter the Real Science with the help of rhetoric i.e. Bogus Science, strawman fallacies, sophistry, intellectual dishonesty and Pseudo Scientific conspiracy theories.
xv) The mastermind of the conspiracy and head of Vaccine Syndicate Mr. Bill Gates has been already found guilty of unlawful and unauthorized trials of vaccines and causing death of 8 female children and Parliamentary Committee of India’s RajyaSabha in their 72nd Report dated 28.08.2013 have already recommended for legal action against office bearers of Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, officials of ICMR and other various accused responsible for such heinous crimes against humanity.
xvi) All the accused were and are well aware that by way of their acts of commission and omission they are going to cause death of millions of innocent people.
But they have chosen money over the human values.
They are the offenders of humanity. They are guilty of Genocide.
They committed cold blood mass murders.
They have taken away the livelihood of common man and made the life of poor people no less than hell. Due to their conspiracies, many people who managed to survive by taking their wrong and harmful medicines are now suffering with serious side effects which have made their lives miserable.
They don’t deserve any sympathy or leniency. Else it will be injustice to all victims and injustice to all mankind.
The minimum punishment in this case will be the;
(a) Death penalty and
(b) Taking over all their movable & immovable properties and distributing it equally to all the people across the world.
13.The Index of the complaint is as under:
“1. Findings of Parliamentary Committee about previous offences of murder through vaccines and it covers up by ‘toxic philanthropist’ and ‘Vaccine Syndicate Kingpin Bill Gates in conspiracy with officials of Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR).
2.Recommendations by Parliamentary Committee for investigation against Bill Gates and other accused through premier Investigation agency i.e. Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI).
3. Confirmation of legality of Report by Parliamentary Committee by the Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court of India.
4. A] Earlier attempt by accused who official to declare false pandemic:
[B] The H1N1 swine flu pandemic was “fake,” and its threat to human health was hyped, and that WHO’s policies were influenced by vaccine manufacturers who benefited from the pandemic virus.
4 A.The American Front line Doctors White Paper on Covid-19 experimental vaccine candidates.
5.Chronology of offences committed by accused as per their conspiracy to commit mass murders i.e. genocide for creating market for unapproved vaccines by accused Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and other vaccine Syndicates.
6.Role played by each accused in execution of the conspiracy
7. Need for thorough and detailed investigation of some co-conspirators in ‘Main Stream Media’ (MSM) involved in the conspiracy.
8. Need for issuing Non-bailable arrest warrants against all the accused.
9. Need for immediate direction for attachment of all movable & immovable properties of the accused.
10.Provisions of Indian Penal Code attracted in the present case.
11. Scientific frauds regarding RTPCR Test
12.Misconception of Asymptomatic transmission
13.Scientific frauds regarding Mask:-
14.Scientific frauds regarding vaccines and legal position for non-mandatory vaccinations.
15. Is it a real pandemic?
16.Legal position settled by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India & various High Courts in India regarding the proofs required to prosecute the conspirators.
17.List of the specific area and issues requiring through investigation of all the accused, their toxic charity foundations and other various persons involved in the conspiracy.
18.Role of officials of UN Human Rights Division by their act of commission & omission in allowing the accused to commit the offence of genocide.
Need for condemning and exposing the selective amnesia and double standards of United Nations Human Rights Division by intervening on 11th June, 2021 for alleged violation of rights of Twitter but willfully keeping quiet for continuous, gravest violation of fundamental rights of people across the world by Twitter, YouTube, Facebook etc. by not allowing the renowned doctors and public to discuss the effectiveness of medicines like ‘Ivermectin’ on social media, only because it is against the vested interest of Vaccine Syndicate.
19. Need for immediate passing a Special Act constituting a Special Court/Tribunal headed by former Chief Justice of India Shri R. M. Lodha to decide the similar cases of vaccine Syndicates in a time bound manner of 2 months from its filing, only one appeal to special dedicated bench of Supreme Court to decide it within 3 weeks from filing.
20.Need for investigation into cause for delay of around 8 years in investigation and prosecution of accused Bill Gates and others under Section 115, 304, 109, 302, 409, r/w 120(B) of Indian Penal Code in his earlier offences related with murder of 8 female children through HPV vaccines, despite the specific findings and recommendations given by Parliamentary Committee in 72nd Report to Rajya Sabha.
21. Need for investigating the role of former CJI Deepak Mishra & other two Judges of the Supreme Court of India Shri Prafulla Pant and Shri Rohinton Fali Nariman under Section 218, 219, 120(B) & 34 of Indian Penal Code for framing the questions related with disputed question of facts which are beyond the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court under Article 32 of the Constitution of India and actually in the domain of Investigating Agency and the trial court but malafidely framed in the Supreme Court only to delay. The adjudication and prosecution of accused Bill Gates and thereby to demoralize the victims and law loving citizens.
22. Main charge against all the accused.”
Download Related Documents :-
A copy of letter dated 29.12.2021 sent by PMO can be downloaded here:
Vaccine Mandate Case – Chief Secretary of Maharashtra Debashish Chakrabarty is guilty of contempt and perjury for filing false affidavit by concealing the facts, claims the Petitioner in his Rejoinder Affidavit
Petitioner Shri. Yohan Tengra has also sought prosecution of Dr. Sadhana Tayade, Director of Health Services, Public Health Department for similar offences under section 52, 191, 192, 193, 199, 200, 201, 202, 218, 471, 474, 120(B), 34, 109 etc. of Indian Penal Code.
All the accused officials and ministers are charged with section 409, 166, 52, 109 etc. of IPC and section 51(b) and 55 of Disaster Management Act, 2005 for bringing unlawful mandates which are ultimately going to reap wrongful profit of thousands of crores to vaccine companies and additionally putting the life of citizens in danger.
Prosecution of Respondent No. 10 Chief Minister Uddhav Thackeray is sought as per provisions of section 120(B) of IPC for his involvement in the conspiracy to bring such unlawful mandates.
The reason for coming up with such suggestions by the Task Force Members is also exposed by pointing out their links with Pharma & Vaccine Companies and their agent NGOs like Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (BMGF).
The state has not denied the serious allegations of fraud and misappropriation of thousands of crores of rupees and therefore as per the law, they have admitted it.
The concluding paragraph of the Rejoinder Affidavit is as under;
“41. CONCLUDING PARAGRAPH
41.1. From the material available on record and legal position settled by Hon’ble Supreme Court and High Court including this Hon’ble Court, it is clear that the notifications and orders passed by the Respondent No. 1 are against the law and the policy decided by the Central Government.
The impugned orders are not based on sound materials or logics but actuated by the ulterior purposes.
41.2. The mandates are unlawful, unconstitutional and violative of Article 14, 19 & 21 of the Constitution of India and therefore liable to quashed and set aside with a cost of Rs. 5 Crores as per law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court.
41.3. The petitioner and the citizens needs to be compensated as per Section 2 of Epidemic Act, 1897 by the State, for the losses incurred by each citizen due to unlawful mandates of the State.
41.4. The Respondent No. 1 has not only passed the unlawful orders but also made false and misleading submissions on affidavit before this Hon’ble Court with ulterior purposes. Therefore they are liable to be prosecuted and punished under Section 52, 191, 192, 193, 199, 200, 201, 202, 218, 471, 474 r/w 120(B), 34, 109 etc. of IPC and hence appropriate direction is required to be given to the Registrar of the High Court to file complaint as per procedure laid down under Section 340 of the Cr. P.C. OR an enquiry through C.B.I. can be ordered as done inSarvepalli Radhakrishnan Vs. Union of India (2019) 14 SCC 761, Afzal and Ors. Vs. State of Haryana and Ors. (1996) 7 SCC 397, ABCD Vs. Union of India (2020) 2 SCC 52.
41.5. Respondent No. 1 Shri.Debashish Chakraborty &Dr. Sadhna Tayde are also liable for action and punishment under Section 2(c) & 12 of the Contempt of Court Act, 1971 r/w Article 215 of the Constitution of India for filing false affidavit before this Hon’ble Court, as per law laid down by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of ABCD Vs. Union of India (2020) 2 SCC 52.
41.6. That the act of Respondent No. 1 & its authorities in deliberately not following the scientific data and suggestions by the experts like Dr. Sanjay Rai of AIIMS New Delhi, regarding not vaccinating the persons with antibodies due to natural immunity is ex-facie having an impact of wastage & misappropriation thousands of crores of public money with giving wrongful profit to vaccine companies and wrongful loss to common man. Therefore the Respondent No. 1 Shri. Debashish Chakraborty, Respondent No. 10 Shri. Uddhav Thackrey and all others involved in the conspiracy, who directly or indirectly supported the unlawful acts and helped in facilitation of the crime needs to be prosecuted under Section 52, 409, 120(B), 109 & 34 etc. of IPC and for any other offences by which they are responsible for death or side effects caused to innocent persons.
41.7. Since the Order/SOP/Notifications issued by the Respondent No. 1 Debashish Chakraborty & others were against the law and policy decisions of the National Authority, therefore all the responsible officers are liable to be prosecuted under Section 51(b), 55 of the Disaster Management Act, 2005r/w Section 52, 166, 188, 120(B), 34, 109, 341, 342, 220 etc. of IPC.
41.8. Since Respondent No. 10 Shri Uddhav Thackrey, Chairman of State Disaster Management Authority, and Chief Minister of Maharastra is accused and complicit to the offence, therefore the investigation has to be done the C.B.I. as per law laid down in Dr.JaishriLaxmanraoPatilVs. State of Maharashtra 2021 SCC OnLineBom 516.
41.9. Appropriate action is required under section 2(b), (c) and 12 of Contempt of Court’s Act, 1971 against the editorial board of Dainik Samna, web portal Live Law and other media persons involved in spreading one-sided, twisted and bias news about the present case or any other similar issues with ulterior motive to create prejudice amongst the public, witnesses and litigants.
41.10. Directions to all media persons to act as per law laid down in NileshNavalakha Vs. UOI 2021 SCC OnLineBom 56 and to publish the news regarding this case or covid-19 treatment in a fair and transparent manner by quoting the views of both the sides and not to spread fear but to remove fear and to help in creating a healthy atmosphere.”
8. The summary of submissions in the Rejoinder Affidavit are as under;
40. SUMMARY OF SUBMISSION:
40.1. The impugned notification dated 10.08.2021 and the subsequent notifications including recent notification dated 27.11.2021 which made classification between the vaccinated and unvaccinated people is not based on any scientific evidence or any logical reasoning admissible under law.
40.2. The notifications are against the policy decisions of Central Government. The Central Government in their affidavits filed before Hon’ble Supreme Court and in their reply under RTI and in the answer by Minister before Lok Sabha made it clear that there cannot be any discrimination on the basis of vaccination status of a person and no benefits or services can be denied to a person who has not taken the vaccines,
40.3. As per section 38 (a) 39 (1) of the Disaster Management Act, 2005, the state Government cannot frame any policies against the policy framed by the National Authority. And as per section 76 the National Authority has to decide the policy as per approvals of the Central Government. Therefore, the notification and order passed by Respondent No.1 which are against the policies of the Central Government are illegal.
40.4. The data given by the Respondent No. 1 itself makes it clear that the vaccinated people are neither protected from Covid-19 infection nor other people are safe from the spread of infection by the vaccinated people. The vaccinated people are also asked to follow the Covid Appropriate Behavior (CAB).
40.5. The another reasoning given by the Respondent No. 1 is about reduction in hospitalization, is not based on any data showing the number and percentage of hospitalization of Covid patients amongst vaccinated and unvaccinated. Even otherwise said submissions are proven to be false from the data given by the petitioner.
The data available in the public domain and relied by the petitioner is not disputed by the Respondent No. 1 therefore, prima facie it has to be accepted as true in allowing the petition as per law laid down by the Full Bench of the Supreme Court in the case of Express Newspapers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. UOI (1986) 1 SCC 133, Manohar Lal Sharma Vs. UOI 2021 SCC OnLine SC 985.
40.6. Even otherwise hypothetical the fear of future hospitalization cannot be ground to discriminate the people and stop them from doing their daily work.
40.7. As per reply given by the Union of India and the scientific research available, the sting operation carried out by the main stream media news paper Mid-Day, makes it clear that the mask mandates are unscientific and providing no protection to healthy people but causing harm to the body and decreasing the oxygen level in them.
The mask mandates are brought by the State (Respondent No. 1) to extort money from common people and the state authorities themselves are not following these rules as exposed from the wedding of daughter of Member of Parliament Shri Sanjay Raut.
40.8. The reasoning given by the state for discrimination has no logic nor having any link with their orders.
Hence said order does not pass the scrutiny of the Article 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India as laid down by Hon’ble Supreme Court and High Court and therefore has to be declared as ultra-virus and need to be quashed forthwith.
40.9. State Authority (Respondent No. 1) acted in violation of section 2 of Epidemic Diseases Act,1897 and section 12 and 13 of Disaster Management Act, 2005 while passing orders to prohibit movements of unvaccinated people but not providing them compensation of the losses incurred by them.
40.10. Several applications for granting compensation are not even replied by the Government. This shows the double standard of the Government.
40.11. The state before this Hon’ble Court instead of being fair and transparent in the matter concerning crores of citizens, have acted in bad faith and is contesting the petition like adversial litigation. The dishonesty is writ large as can be seen from the very fact that despite the court’s order that the matter is serious and concerning fundamental rights of the citizen, the State Authority did not file the proper reply nor placed the correct and complete data before the Court.
State’s action is in Contempt of the Supreme Court & High Court guidelines in Manohar Lal Sharma Vs. UOI 2021 SCC OnLine SC 985, Express Newspapers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. UOI (1986) 1 SCC 133, Seethalakshmi Vs. State of Tamil Nadu 1989 SCC OnLine Mad 272, Amardeepsingh Thakur Vs. Deputy Inspector General 2020 SCC OnLineBom 6621.
40.12. The reply affidavit is false & misleading and prepared with suppression, twisting and dishonest concealment of facts.
40.13. No reasoning is given by the state authorities to the specific ground taken by the Petitioner that as to why, the safest person, who had previous infection of Covid-19 and those have developed antibodies are being forced to take vaccines which is giving no benefit to them but causing harm to their bodies and causing loss to the tune of thousands of crores of public money. As per their own survey, there are more than 85% Citizen having developed antibodies.
40.13.1. Hence, the decision taken and order passed by the Respondent No.1 by ignoring this crucial data vitiates the order and lead to only one conclusion that the authorities passed the order by practising ‘Fraud on Power’ as per law laid down in Vijay Shekhar Vs. UOI (2004) 4 SCC 666 & Harshit Agarwal Vs. UOI (2021) 2 SCC 710.
40.13.2. This is a sufficient ground to draw an inference of malafides of the state authority and to order investigation through C.B.I. as ruled by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Noida Entrepreneurs Association Vs. Noida (2011) 6 SCC 508.
40.14. The Respondent No. 1 Chief Secretary Shri. Debashish Chakrabarty has not taken two doses but then too he is attending the Government office and has affirmed the affidavit from his office. Thismake it clear that the rules are not followed by the state authority itself. Which further means that the state officials are aware that non-compliance to their illogical, unscientific and unlawful rules will cause no threat to themselves or to the public.
Hence their opposition to the petition is unjustified and actuated with malice, ill-will, ulterior motive and malafide intention.
40.15. Government Pleaders and Senior Counsel representing the State of Maharashtra were duty bound to prepare draft and place full facts and documentary evidence before the Court even if they are against their clients. And to make lawful submissions and should not place reliance on twisted and suppressed data and per-incuriam, irrelevant judgments, as per law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court and this Hon’ble Court in Shiv Kumar Vs. Hukam Chand (1999) 7 SCC 467(F.B), E. S. Reddi Vs. Chief Secretary, Government of A.P (1987) 3 SCC 258, Lal Bahadur Gautam Vs. State (2019) 6 SCC 441, Heena Nikhil Dharia Vs. KokilabenKirtikumarNayak and Ors. 2016 SCCOnLineBom 9859, State of Orissa Vs. Nalinikanta Muduli (2004) 7 SCC 19.
40.15.1. But Government Pleader and Sr. Counsel did not perform their duty as per law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court and this Hon’ble Court.
40.15.2. In fact, they took technical objection on incorrect facts.
40.16. The impugned orders passed by the State authorities and Respondent No. 1 are only executive orders. They are not placed before both the Houses of State Legislature as mandated under Section 78 (3) of the Disaster Management Act, 2005.
40.16.1. As per Article 19, 21 of the Constitution of India the curtailment of fundamental rights cannot be on the basis of executive orders but should be by a law enacted by the Parliament. Such orders need to be quashed. [Re. Dinthar Incident Vs. State of Mizoram 2021 SCC OnLineGau 1313].
40.17. The impugned orders are against the policy decisions of National Authority under Disaster Management Act, 2005 and the Central Government and it is in violation of Section 38(a) & 39(1) of the Act and therefore it is ultra-vires, null,void& vitiated.
As per Section 76 of the Disaster Management Act, 2005 the regulations should be made with the prior approval of the Central Government. Hence, the impugned notifications and orders are unlawful and made in breach of the guidelines by the Central Government.
40.17.1. It is an offence under Section 166, 188, 341, 342, 220, 409, 120(B), 34 etc.of IPC on the part of Respondent No. 1 Chief Secretary and others who are directly and indirectly involved in the conspiracy.
40.18. The impugned notifications are also illegal as they are passed without taking approval from the National Platform for Disaster Risk Reduction (NPDRR). Therefore, impugned notifications are illegal for violation of Rule 3 of Notification No. 47-31/2012-DM-111 dated 05.07.2017.
40.19. The data shows that hospitalization, infection amongst vaccinated is higher than the unvaccinated.
40.20. State did not perform their duty of publishing fatal side effects of vaccines and are forcing the people to take vaccines. The informed consent of the citizens is obtained either by deception or by force, which is contempt of law laid down in Common Cause Vs. Union of India (2018) 5 SCC 1, Montgomery’ s Case  UKSC 11 etc. It is violation of Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights, 2005.
40.21. The petitioner was compelled to take vaccine and therefore State is bound to compensate all victim citizen and the petitioner in view of law laid down in Registrar General Vs. State of Meghalaya 2021 SCC OnLineMegh 130.
40.22. Respondent No 10 Shri Uddhav Thackery by his act of commission and omission is liable to be prosecuted along with the Respondent No.1 Shri Debashish Chakraborty &Ors. as per section 120(B), 34,109 of IPC.
40.23. The media persons involved in the conspiracy committed contempt of judgment in the case of NileshNavalakha Vs. UOI 2021 SCC OnLineBom 56 by publishing one sided news with ulterior motive to misled and confuse the public and witnesses and thereby to prejudice the cause.
40.23. The media persons and more particularly the editorial board of Marathi Daily Samna, which is owned by wife of Respondent No.10 and web portal Live Law are also liable to be prosecuted in view provisions of the section 10 of Evidence Act and section 120 (B) & 34 of IPC.
Prime Minister Narendra Modi added as a party Respondent by the High Court of Bombay and askedto assist High Court in deciding the illegality of circulars issued by Maharashtra Government on vaccine mandates
In a big development in a PIL filed before Bombay High Court challenging the arbitrary vaccine mandates of the State Government, the Counsel for Petitioner has sent a notice to Respondent No. 8Shri. Narendra Modi, calling upon him to authorize a person to assist the High Court in deciding the Petition on merits.
Maharashtra Government’s game is over nowas they cannot formulate any rule against the National Authority and that the National Authority is against any restriction on unvaccinated.
The Division Bench of Bombay High Courthas accepted the request of Adv. Nilesh Ojha representing the Petitioner, to add the National Disaster Management Authority (NDMA) as a Respondent.
Prime Minister Shri. Narendra Modi is the Chairman of the NDMA. Courthas asked NDMA to help the Court in deciding the petition on merits.
The Court’s order dated 22.12.2021 reads thus;
“2. List the PIL petitions ‘First on Board’ on January 3, 2022.
3.On the oral prayer of the learned advocates for the petitioners, National Disaster Management Authority (NDMA) is impleaded as a Respondent in the PIL petitions. Service be effected on the NDMA with an intimation of the next date.
4.We are conscious of the fact that although no relief has been claimed against it, the presence of the NDMA could be of assistance for us to decide the PIL petitions finally on merits.”
This issue came before the Court due to the submission in an additional Affidavit filed by the Petitioner Shri. Yohan Tengra that the State is putting restrictions against the policy decisions of Central Government, which is not permissible as per Section 38(1) & 39(a) of the Disaster Management Act, 2005.
The State and District Authority who are taking contrary standare liable for punishment under Section 51(b), 55 of Disaster Management Act, 2005 and Section 166, 120(B), 34 etc. of Indian Penal Code.
In support of the submission, the counsel for the Petitioner has relied upon the Affidavits filed by the Union of India before the Hon’ble Bombay High Court and the Hon’ble Supreme Court.
In the Affidavit filed before the Bombay High Court, Bench of Goa in W. P. No. 1820 of 2021 on dated 08.10.2021, it is a clear stand of Government of India and Ministry of Health and Family Welfare that,COVID-19 vaccination is completely voluntary for all citizens of India. Government of India has not formulated or suggested any policies for discrimination between citizens of India on the basis of their vaccination status.
Excerpts from the relevant paragraphs are as under;
“9. That, it is further humbly submitted that the directions and guidelines released by Government of India and Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, do not entail compulsory or forcible vaccination against COVID-19 disease implying that COVID-19 vaccination is completely voluntary for all citizens of India. Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, Government of India has not formulated or suggested any policies for discrimination between citizens of India on the basis of their vaccination status.
10.That, it is duly advised, advertised and communicated by MoHFW through various print and social media platforms that all citizens should get vaccinated, but this in no way implies that any person can be forced to be vaccinated against her / his wishes.”
On 28 November, 2021 in a Counter Affidavit filed before Hon’ble Supreme Court by Dr. P.B.N. Prasad, working as Joint Drugs Controller (India), Central Drugs Standard Control Organisation, Directorate General of Health Services, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, Government of India, it is once again reiterated that vaccination is not linked to any benefits or services.
The Petitioner also relied on the judgment in Madan Mili’s2021 SCC OnLineGau 1503,case where policy decision of Union of India declared in Lok Sabha was also taken into consideration as under;
“3. The Petitioner contends that as per the RTI Information furnished by the Ministry of Health & Family Welfare, which is available on the website of the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, Government of India, Covid-19 vaccination is not mandatory but voluntary. A copy of the RTI Information available in the website of the Ministry of Health & Family Welfare, Government of India, has been annexed by the petitioner as Annexure 3 to the petition. The petitioner also refers to an answer given on 19.03.2021 in the Lok Sabha to an Unstarred Question No. 3976 by the Minister of State in the Ministry of Health & Family Welfare, Government of India (Annexure 4 to the petition) stating that there is no provision of compensation for recipients of Covid-19 Vaccination against any kind of side effects or medical complication that may arise due to inoculation. The Covid-19 Vaccination is entirely voluntary for the beneficiaries.”
The Counsel appearing for the State of Maharashtra submitted that, the stand of Union of India cannot be said to be the stand of National Authority under Disaster Management Act, 2005.
Therefore, Counsel for Petitioner requested the Court to add the National Authority as Respondent and to clear their stand so as to decide the issue, once and for all.
The Courthas accepted the request and added NDMA as a party Respondent.
The Counsel for Petitioner has sent a Notice to Respondent No. 8 – Shri. Narendra Modi, Prime Minister and Chairman of NDMA to appoint any officer to represent before the Bombay High Court and make the stand clear including prosecution of Chief Secretary and other officers of Maharashtra who are involved in bringing unlawful mandates and violating fundamental rights of the citizen.
Excerpts from the Notice to Prime Minister:-
“1.That, in the above said background, the next submission of the Counsel for the Petitioner was that in view of Section 38(1) & 39(a) of Disaster Management Act, 2005; the State or District Authorities cannot bring any rules or pass any orders which are contrary to the policy decision of the National Authority.
2.However, the Hon’ble High Court put a query seeking clarification, as to, if any specific order is passed by the National Authority stating that no force or coercion in vaccination.
3.The submission of the Counsel for the Petitioner is that, the policy decision of Union of India’s Heath Ministry in their Affidavits before the Bombay High Court&the Supreme Court and the policy decision of the Union of India, as answered in Lok Sabha, is the stand of National Disaster Management Authority and they are not having any contrary stand on it. Because Hon’ble Prime Minister of India himself is the Chairman of the National Disaster Management Authority (NDMA).
4.In this regard, already a Notice is served by us, upon the Advocate for Union of India, on 20.12.2021 requesting them to throw light on the controversy. Thereafter, on 22.12.2021, as per the request of counsel for Petitioner, the National Disaster Management Authority is added as a party Respondent.
5.Hence, you are requested to forthwith get explanation from the concerned department and provide us a Written Reply at the earliest through person appointed for representing the case before Hon’ble High Court.
6.That, recently the Health Ministry of Japan has made following declaration/orders on their website:
“Consent to vaccination
Although we encourage all citizens to receive the COVID-19 vaccination, it is not compulsory or mandatory. Vaccination will be given only with the consent of the person to be vaccinated after the information provided. Please get vaccinated of your own decision, understanding both the effectiveness in preventing infectious diseases and the risk of side effects. No vaccination will be given without consent. Please do not force anyone in your workplace or those who around you to be vaccinated, and do not discriminate against those who have not been vaccinated.”
7.Furthermore, the Government of Japan also asked the citizens to make complaints to Human Rights Division, if there is any discrimination on the basis of vaccination status.
8.That the above declaration is mandatory to all countries across the world because of Universal Declaration on Bioethics & Human Rights, 2005 and also as per law laid down inMontgomery’s case  UKSC 11,Airdale NHS Trust v/s. Bland (1993) 1 All ER 821, Common Cause v/s. Union of India (2018) 5SCC 1, Registrar General v/s. State of Meghalaya 2021 SCC OnLineMegh 130.
9. Needless to mention here that, in a recent case of vaccine injury, the Government of Singapore granted a compensation of Rs. 1 Crore 78 Lakhs to the victim, as the vaccine caused increase in heart beats.
10.That, in the case of side effects of vaccines, the United States’ Government has set up the ‘National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program’. In the case of side effects of MMR vaccines the Court granted a settlement of 101 Million U.S. Dollars (Rupees 7,50,34,31,400 Crores).
11.That, in another case related with misrepresentation by pharma companies, by suppressing the side effects of medicines. The companies’ failure to report certain safety data was also taken into consideration. The investigating agency of the US, on their own, investigated and recovered an amount 10.2 Billion US Dollars (Approx. Rupees76,464 Crores.)
12.The Constitution Bench of Hon’ble Supreme Courtin the case of Anita Kushwaha v/s. Pushap Sadan (2016)8SCC509, hasruled that,the life of Indian Citizen is not less pricy than the life of people in England or anywhere. But in India the rights are more precious. It is ruled that;
“18…Bose,J.emphasized the importance of the right of any person to apply to the Court and demand that he be dealt with according to law. Hesaid: (Prabhakar Kesheocase [Prabhakar Kesheo Tare v. Emperor, AIR 1943 Nag 26: 1942 SCC OnLine MP 78],SCCOnLine MPpara1)
“1. … The right is prized in India no less highly than in England, or indeed any other part of the Empire, perhapseven more highly here than elsewhere; and it is zealouslyguarded by the Courts.”
13.That as pointed out during the hearing of the case, the WHO has warned the people getting CoviShield (AstraZeneca) vaccines to be careful as it is causing a serious paralytic disease GBS (Guillain Barre Syndrome).
16.That, your good-self are requested to point out the concerned officials that, as per law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, in the case of State of Odisha v/s. PartimaMohanty 2021 SCC OnLine SC 1222, the public servant, more particularly from the office of Health Ministry, if failed to take an action as expected then he/she will be liable for prosecution under section 218, 201, 202, 120(B), 34, 109 etc. of Indian Penal Code.
17.Hence, you are requested to do the needful as per the preceding paras of the notice and more particularly to:
(a) Clarify the stand of National Disaster Management Authority, regarding policies of discriminating citizen on the basis of their vaccination status;
(b) Course of action taken or being taken under section 51(b) & 55 of National Disaster Management Act, 2005 against State Authorities including District Collectors who are acting contrary to the policy decisions and directives of National Disaster Management Authority.
(c) Direction to Ministry of Health &Family Welfare to update their website and give the correct and proper information about the side effects of vaccines which is mandatory as per Good Clinical Practices of ‘informed consent’ laid down under Drugs & Cosmetics Act, 1940 and also as per Universal Declaration on Bioethics & Human Rights, 2005 and law laid down in Montgomery’s case  UKSC 11.”
The Bombay High Court will hear this matter next on January 3, 2022.
MULTIPLE PETITIONS FILED IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CHALLENGING THE VACCINE MANDATES OF STATE GOVERNMENTS.
The Central Government in its affidavit before the Supreme Court has supported the cause of Petitioner that vaccination cannot be forced and that no service or benefits shall be denied for not taking vaccines.
29 Petitions from all states are filed in the Supreme Court to stop unlawful vaccine & mask mandate.
Notice served to Chief Secretary of Maharashtra & District Collectors to forthwith stop unlawful mask & vaccine rules as matter is sub judice before the Supreme Court.
Debashish Chakraborty – Chief Secretary of Maharashtra,Mr. Iqbal Chahal – BMC Commissioner, Mr. Suresh Kakani – BMC Additional Commissioner, Mr. Sunil Chavan – Aurangabad District Collector and others are made Party Respondent.
Supreme Court to hear the petitions on December 13, 2021.
Around 500 lawyers are going to represent the petitioners.
Many advocates/associates including Indian Bar Association have extended their support to the cause raised by the petitioner that no one can be forced to get vaccines and wear masks. No services and benefits can be linked to the vaccination status of a person. Many courts across the world including the U.S. courts and various High Courts in India have quashed or stayed such illegal mandates.
As per the law clarified by the Full Bench of Supreme Court in Abdul Karim vs. M. K. Prakash , AIR 1976 SC 859,if any order is sub judice before Supreme Court and Court is seized of the matter and even if no stay is granted,even then, the authorities should stay their hands away and wait for the final adjudication by the court, else the concerned authority will be liable for punishment of six months imprisonment under Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.
The Supreme Court had sentenced Maharashtra’s Chief Secretary Ashok Khot and Minister Saroop singh Naik under contempt and sent them to jail for one month.
No immunity to vaccine companies – Central Government tells Supreme Court in its affidavit before the Supreme Court.
It is a major setback to the toxic philanthropist and vaccine mafia’s Kingpin Bill Gates and his partner Adar Poonawalla, and other co-accused who have been prosecuted for mass murders through vaccines.They are also charged for offences of cheating public at large with false narratives and conspiracy theories.
In a recent petition filed before Bombay High Court Writ Petition (ST) No. 18017 of 2021,the mother of deceased has made following prayers;
“PRAYERS: It is therefore humbly prayed for;
i) B.I. be directed to treat this petition as F.I.R. and prosecute the offender as done by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Noida Entrepreneurs Association Vs. Noida (2011) 6 SCC 508and followed by this Hon’ble Court in the matter between ParamBir Singh v. State of Maharashtra, 2021 SCC OnLineBom 516.
ii) B.I. be further directed to immediately start custodial interrogation of the accused and take use of scientific tests like Lie Detector Test, Brain Mapping Test and Narco Analysis Test to unearth the complete conspiracy and to save the life of Indian Citizen;
iii)Direction to Respondent No. 1 i.e. State of Maharashtra to pay an interim compensation of Rs. 100 crores to the Petitioner forthwith and then to recover it from the guilty officials responsible for death of the Petitioners citizen by their deliberate and unlawful act of commission and omission.
iii) Any other order which this Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.”
The Central Government in its affidavit dated 29th Nov 2021 filed before Supreme Court of India in a petition filed by Dr.JacobPuliyel vs. Union of India Writ Petition (C) No. 607 of 2021,had made it clear that the Government has not granted any protection / immunity from prosecution to the vaccine companies.
The relevant para 65 reads thus;
“VIII.INDEMNIFICATION OF VACCINE MANUFACTURERS
65. No indemnity has been granted and the current legal regime under the New Drugs and Clinical Trials Rules, 2019 and Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 does not contain any such provisions.”
Download Related Documents :-
A copy of petition filed by Smt. KiranYadav can be downloaded here;
Affidavit filed by Central Government in Supreme Court on November 29, 2021 has overruled the order passed by Mr. Sitaram Kunte, Chief Secretary of Maharashtra Government, on November 28, 2021
The affidavit has made it clear that the orders, GR, SOPs issued by Maharashtra, Tamilnadu, Kerala and any other state government, District Collector about vaccine mandates are illegal.
Supreme Court has asked the petitioner to add all the states who are issuing such mandates, as party Respondentin the case.
Central Government has once again made it clear that vaccines are not mandatory and it is not connected with any benefit any services. The affidavit filed by Central Government before Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter between Dr. Jacob Puliyel Vs. Union of India Writ Petition (Civil) No. 607 Of 2021 is loud proof that Maharashtra and other governments are acting illegally.
In the Counter Affidavit filed by Dr. P.B.N. Prasad, working as Joint Drugs Controller (India), Central Drugs Standard Control Organisation, Directorate General of Health Services, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, Government of India on 28th November 2021, the relevant Paragraph 64 reads as under;
“64. In so far as the Petitioner’s submissions regarding Covid 19 vaccine being mandatory, as per the Operational Guidelines document, COVID-19 vaccination is voluntary. However, it is emphasised and encouraged that all individuals take vaccination for public health and in his/ her interest as well as public interest since in case of pandemic, an individual’s ill health has a direct effect on the society. Covid-19 vaccination is also not linked to any benefits or services. Therefore, any submissions made by the Petitioner to the contrary, in so far as the Answering Respondents are concerned, is denied.”
World’s First Vaccine Murder case against Bill Gates, Adar Poonawalla filed in India’s High Court
World’s First Vaccine Murder case against Bill Gates, Adar Poonawalla filed in India’s High Court. [Kiran Yadav Vs. State and ors.Criminal Writ Petition (St.) 18017 of 2021]
Petitioner has sought prosecution of AstraZeneca’s (Covishield) manufacturer Bill Gates, his partner Adar Poonawalla and other Government officials and leaders involved in the murder of a 23 year old man, who lost his life because of vaccination. The deceased took the Covishield vaccine by believing in the false narrative that the vaccine is completely safe and also owing to the compliance requirement set by the Railways that only double vaccinated people would be allowed to travel.
The Government of India’s AEFI (Adverse Event Following Immunisation) Committee has recently admitted that the death of Dr.SnehalLunawat,was due to side effects of the Covishield vaccine. The said report has exposed the falsity of the claim made by vaccine syndicatethat vaccines are totally safe.
Petitioner has claimed Rs. 1000 crores ($ 134 million USD) compensation and has asked for interim compensation of Rs. 100 crores ($ 13.4 million USD).
Petitioner has also sought Lie Detector, Narco Analysis Test of accused Bill Gates and others.
In a case before the American Court regarding the side effects of MR vaccines, the Court accepted the settlement of compensation of 101 Million US Dollars (around Rs. 752 Crores) to the victim.
In another case in America, the CIA, FDA’s office of criminal investigation, recovered around 10.2 Billion US Dollar (around Rs.76,00 crores) from Pharma Company GlaxoSmithKline for various offences including suppression of side effects of the medicines and putting the life of Americans in danger.
The company’s unlawful promotion of certain prescription drugs, its failure to report certain safety data, and its civil liability for alleged false price reporting practices.
The United States further alleges that GSK sponsored dinner programs, lunch programs, spa programs and similar activities to promote the use of Paxil in children and adolescents. GSK paid a speaker to talk to an audience of doctors and paid for the meal or spa treatment for the doctors who attended.
Between 2001 and 2007, GSK failed to include certain safety data about Avandia, a diabetes drug.
The missing information included data regarding certain post-marketing studies, as well as data regarding two studies undertaken in response to European regulators’ concerns about the cardiovascular safety of Avandia. Since 2007, the FDA has added two black box warnings to the Avandia label to alert physicians about the potential increased risk of (1) congestive heart failure, and (2) myocardial infarction (heart attack).
It also includes allegations that GSK paid kickbacks to health care professionals to induce them to promote and prescribe these drugs as well as the drugs Imitrex, Lotronex, Flovent and Valtrex. The United States alleges that this conduct caused false claims to be submitted to federal health care programs.
Constitution Bench of Supreme Court of India in Anita Kushwaha’s case (2016) 8 SCC 509,made it clear that the rights of Indians are no lesser than the people across the world.
In India lakhs of compensation claims are expected to be filed soon.
The judgment in Montgomery’s case  UKSC 11, Airdale NHS Trust Vs. Bland (1993) 1 All ER 821, Common Cause Vs. Union of India (2018) 5 SCC 1 and Registrar General Vs. State of Meghalaya 2021 SCC OnLineMegh 130 and also the Universal Declaration on Bioethics & Human Rights, 2005, makes it clear that before giving vaccine or any treatment to a person, he should be informed about the side effects of the medicine and also about the alternate remedies available.
If any person is vaccinated by suppressing the facts or by telling a lie that the said vaccines are completely safe, amount to the consent being obtained under deception. In India, vaccination under deception or by force/coercion or by putting certain stiflingconditions, is a civil and criminal wrong. [Registrar General Vs. State of Meghalaya 2021 SCC OnLineMegh 130]
Based on the abovesaid legal position the petitioner asked for registration of an F.I.R. under Section 52, 115, 302, 409, 120(B), 420, 34, 109etc. of IPC and section 51(b), 55 of the Disaster Management Act, 2005 against concerned officials who were marketing the vaccines as completely safe.
Bill Gates and Adar Poonawalla, the partners in manufacturing the Covishield (AstraZeneca) vaccine are made accused for their involvement in conspiracy.
In India, the person allowing the false marketing of his product is also held to be guilty due to his act of commission and omission. In this regard the provisions of Section 120(B), 34, 109 etc. of IPC get attracted to make Bill Gates and Adar Poonawalla guilty of mass murders i.e. Section 302, 115, etc. of IPC.
The prayers in the petition read thus;
“i)C.B.I. be directed to treat this petition as F.I.R. and prosecute the offender as done by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Noida Entrepreneurs Association Vs. Noida (2011) 6 SCC 508and followed by this Hon’ble Court in the matter between Param Bir Singh v. State of Maharashtra, 2021 SCC OnLineBom 516.
ii)B.I. be further directed to immediately start custodial interrogation of the accused and take use of scientific tests like Lie Detector Test, Brain Mapping Test and Narco Analysis Test to unearth the complete conspiracy and to save the life of Indian Citizen;
iii)Direction to Respondent No. 1 i.e. State of Maharashtra to pay an interim compensation of Rs. 100 crores to the Petitioner forthwith and then to recover it from the guilty officials responsible for death of the Petitioners citizen by their deliberate and unlawful act of commission and omission.”
As per the expert opinion, considering the proofs of sterling nature, Bill Gates and Adar Poonawalla will get death penalty.
The Petitioner also relied upon the criminal antecedents of Bill Gates in killing 8 female children by unauthorized trial of HPV vaccines in India and judgment of Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in Kalpana Mehta’s Case (2018) 7 SCC 1, which is a strong proof against Bill Gates and his vaccine syndicate.
Petitioner has also referred to the proofs of sinister plan of Bill Gates in polio programme which spoiled the lives of 4.5 lakh children in India as they suffered new type of paralysis. This is also an additional proof of Bill Gates’ pervert and criminal mindset.
As per experts, there is no chance of Bill Gates getting bail in the case and all the movable and immovable properties of the accused will be confiscated soon.
Various social organizations and common people have decided to exercise citizen’s right to arrest the accused as provided under section 43 of Cr.P.C. As per the said section, any citizen can arrest Bill Gates, Adar Poonawalla and other accused and handover them to the police.
Recently in Australia around 10,000 compensation claims are filed against the vaccine injury.