Awaken India Movement (AIM) files a Complaint before CBI to arrest Srinath Reddy and other fraudsters at PHFI

• Misappropriation of Rs. 82 Crores of public money. CBI has already registered an FIR. Fraud done by members of PHFI exposed
• Indian Bar Association demands that the PHFI’s accused trustees should be added as co-accused and to be arrested soon
• The accusedhave misappropriated the public money and are therefore liable for offences under section 409,120(B) & 34 etc. of IPC
• CBI has already registered an FIR and is investigating the case
• Indian Bar Association shall be sending representation to CBI to add all the trustees of PHFI as accused
• In a Complaint given by Adv. Ashwini Upadhyay, the Intelligence Bureau has also initiated enquiry against PHFI
• There is another objectionable issue of payment of high salaries of around Rs. 1 Crore to trustees which should also be investigated
• The PFHI is getting funds from tainted foundations like ‘Bill &Milinda Gates Foundation’
• The Parliamentary Committee’s 72^nd enquiry report has already exposed the conspiracy of Bill Gates and their entity PATH

As per Section 20 of Indian Trusts Act, the trustees are bound to employ reasonable care, prudence and intelligence. It is their duty to ascertain whether their investment decisions are proper.

In Chapman Vs. Browne (1902)1 Ch. 785, it was case where trustee invested the trust’s money in an improper way without taking proper precaution and legal advice. A case came to be filed against said trustee. The Court declared that the investment was a breach of trust. The Court further ordered that the defaulting trustee should deposit the said amount in Court. The appeal filed by the defaulter trustee was dismissed with cost.

Similar view is taken by the three Judge Queen’s Bench in the case of Jonathan Ingham Learoyd And William Edwin Carter And Elizabeth Whiteley [L.R.] 12 App. Cas. 727it is ruled as under;

“The trustees had not acted with ordinary prudence, and were liable to make good the money with interest at 4 per cent from the date of the last payment.

Business men of ordinary prudence may, and frequently do, select investments which are more or less of a speculative character; but it is the duty of a trustee to confine himself to the class of investments which are permitted by the trust, and likewise to avoid all investments of that class which are attended with hazard.

It plainly appears from these answers that the appellants had no information regarding the subjects mortgaged except what was contained in the report of their valuators.

In these circumstances, I think it has been established that, at the time of taking the security, the appellants altogether failed to exercise that ordinary amount of care which the law required of them.Make them liable for an improper and unauthorized investment, at the trial before Bacon V.C.

Such Trustees are liable to be punished under Section 409 of The Indian Penal Code. It reads thus;

“409.Criminal breach of trust by public servant, or by banker, merchant or agent.—Whoever, being in any manner entrusted with property, or with any dominion over property in his capacity of a public servant or in the way of his business as a banker, mer­chant, factor, broker, attorney or agent, commits criminal breach of trust in respect of that property, shall be punished with 1[imprisonment for life], or with imprisonment of either descrip­tion for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.”
It is settled law by the Supreme Court and High Court that the trustees who did not oppose the misappropriation of money, should also be liable for prosecution and they should not be granted anticipatory bail.
InRajendraRamdasChaudhari Vs The State of Maharashtra and The Superintendent of Police MANU/MH/0111/2009, Hon’ble High Court rejected the bail of such accused and observed as under;

“Misappropriation of public fund. – offences under section Sections 34, 120-B, 201, 406, 408, 409, 420, 465, 468 and 471 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC).

The present applicant should have opposed such proposals during the meetings, if he was really innocent. Not only that the applicant has attended the number of meetings and signed the proceedings of the meetings. The argument of the learned A.P.P. that the present applicant is vicariously liable for all the bogus loans, sanctioned during his period, has considerable substance and said the contention cannot be rejected at outright.

The present applicant has not opposed any of the bogus loan cases during the meetings in which he attended and signed the proceedings.

If the arguments of the learned A.P.P. are carefully perused, various instances have been cited by the A.P.P. to show that how the loans are advanced illegally to the persons contrary to the Rules and Regulations of R.B.I., provisions of Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act and Rules there under and relevant directions issued by the Government from time to time.

Nobody made any attempt to verify whether the borrowers were eligible, whether the proper procedure was followed, whether the sufficient securities were obtained and whether such huge loans were likely to be recovered.

15. The Supreme Court in the case of Narinderjit Singh Sahni and Anr. v. Union of India and Ors. reported in MANU/SC/0644/2001: AIR2001SC3810 has observed that if accused facing a charge under Sections 406, 409, 420and 120-B is ordinarily not entitled to invoke the provisions of Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code unless it is established that such criminal accusation is not a bona fide one.
16. In the case of Ram NarainPoply v. Central Bureau of Investigation with Pramod Kumar Monocha v. Central Bureau of Investigation with Vinayak Narayan Deosthali reported in MANU/SC/0017/2003: 2003CriLJ4801 the Supreme Court has observed thus: 382. The cause of the community deserves better treatment at the hands of the Court in the discharge of its judicial functions. The Community or the Stateis not a persona non granta whose cause may be treated with disdain. The entire community is aggrieved if economic offenders who ruin the economy of theState are not brought to book. A murder maybe committed in the heat of moment upon passions being aroused. An economic offences is committed with cool calculation and deliberate design with an eye on personal profit regardless of the consequence to the Community. A disregard for the interest of the community can be manifested only at the cost of forfeiting the trust and faith of the community in the system to administer justice in an even handed manner without fear of criticism from the quarters which view white collar crimes with a permissive eye unmindful of the damage done to the national Economy and National Interest, as was aptly stated in State of Gujrat v. MahanlalJitamaljiPorwal and Anr. A.I.R. 1987 1321.
17. The Supreme Court in the case of HimanshuChandravadan Desai and Ors. v. Stateof Gujrat reported in 2006 Cri. L.J. 136 while considering bail application of the applicants therein has observed thus:

Accused a Director of Bank and others involved in Bank Scam – Siphoned off funds of Bank worth crores by bogus loans and fictitious letters of credit in name of their friends, relatives etc. Offence is very serious Evidence showing their prima facie involvement in offence – Having regard to huge amounts involved there is danger of accused absconding, if released on bail, or attempting to tamper with evidence by pressurizing witnesses Refusal of bail is proper.”

‘No person can be forced to be vaccinated against his/her wishes’ – states the latest affidavit filed by Ministry of Health and Family Welfare

• Vaccination of teachers or anyone for that matter, is not mandatory
• Central Government has filed an affidavit in Bombay High Court
• Maharashtra Government’s unlawfulness exposed

In a new exposure of malafides of State Government, unravelled by the Central Government, it is made clear that the Central Government has never issued any directions for mandatory vaccination. However, the State Government authorities have started pressurizing and harassing teachers and the common man to take vaccines. The affidavit is filed in a Writ Petition No. 1820 of 2021 filed by teaches (Mr. Nelson Fernandes&AnrVs. State of Goa).

The relevant paras of the affidavit dated 08.10.2021 filed by the Under Secretary of Ministry of Health & Family Welfare reads thus;

“9. 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.
“11 That, as per the existing guidelines, there is no provisions for forcing any citizen to book appointment for Covid Vaccination

Corona scandal and death of a woman: Court orders registration of FIR against six doctors.

The woman had lost her life in a minor operation and the doctors had refused to give her dead body to her family, based on a bogus corona positive RT-PCR test.

Her husband had already done five tests – one RAT and four RT-PCR tests and all were negative, which proved the forgery and dishonesty of the Doctors. The Court directed the police for registration of FIR under offences of conspiracy, forgery, causing death by negligence and destroying evidence.The Police Station at Panvel City has already registered an FIR against six Doctors u. sec 304-A, 465,471,120(B), 201, r/w 34 of IPC.

The court order reads thus;

“6. Now coming to the merits of the present application, it could  be seen that, a woman has lost her life over a minor operation of abortion. As the operation was conducted in the high tide of the ongoing pandemic, therefore, the concerned doctors ought to have scrupulously followed the guidelines of the ICMR regarding testing of the patients before conducting any operation. From the allegations set­ forth in the present application, it could be seen that, there are about 6 reports for COVID­19, out of which one is positive and the others are negative. Shockingly, the sample for these tests were taken in a short span of 3 days. Therefore, the present case appears to   be   case study   material   to   find   out   how   a  person   can   come negative for COVID­19 in just one day. The allegations that, the Gandhi hospital was not releasing the dead body on the guise of the deceased being tested positive for COVID­19 and then eventually allowing   postmortem   to   be   conducted   raises   further   suspicion. Therefore, whether these tests were really conducted or it was used as an excuse to not allow the applicant and his family to know the real cause of death is to be investigated which can be done only by the police machinery. Further, if this allegation has any truth to it then the next thing to discern is why this route was adopted by the non­ applicants. Was it to hide any medical negligence that resulted in the death of the deceased Ashwini?  These things can be brought before   the   Court   which   can   only   be   done   after   a   thorough investigation   by   the   police   machinery.   Therefore,   this   Court   is convinced that, the present application deserves directions under section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C. for registering an offence under section 304­A, 465, 471, 201, 120­B r/w 34 of the I.P.C.

The Officer in ­charge of Panvel City police station is  directed as per section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C. to register the first information report against the non­ applicants for offence p.u.s. 304­-A, 465, 471, 120­B, 201 r/w 34 of the I.P.C. and investigate in accordance with law.”

Urgent need to rectify the utter disregard for Science regarding children’s corona vaccines

• Indian Bar Association (IBA) has sought prosecution of Dr. V.G. Somani, Dr.RandeepGuleria and others for misuse of their position to create a false alarm of emergency in children, while there is no emergency
• ‘Doctors for Truth’ and Concerned Citizens of India have written to Hon’ble Prime Minister of India on October 7, 2021 regarding urgent need to rectify the utter disregard for Science while deciding corona related measures that have special worrying effects on children
• IBA has sent its Letter of Representation on October 8, 2021 endorsing the concerns expressed in above mentioned letter and in addition, IBA has called for CBI investigation against Dr. V.G. Somani, RandeepGuleria and others for misuse and fraud on power

More than 100 doctors and more than 1000 members of civil society have signed a letter sent to Hon’ble Prime Minister of India on October 7, 2021 exhorting not to go ahead with vaccination of children as they have already developed immunity and are at no risk of severe Covid. The letter highlights that :

1. The corona vaccines are not fully approved (approved for restricted use only) without any knowledge of long-term effects.
2. Experts have confirmed that letting children catch Covid may be safer than giving them vaccines
3. Our children have already acquired immunity post Covid infection and on the other hand, these experimental vaccines wherever they are rolled out, are not found to be safe enough
4. Worldwide a cascade of serious Adverse Effects have been seen in adults and children in 2021 after the ‘Emergency Use Authorisation’ was granted for restricted use of Covid-19 vaccines
5. As per a German Court verdict, that masks, distancing and regular testing of children for Covid-19 should not be done. These measures are not only not useful but are actually harmful

The signatories of the letter demand that:

1. All Covid-19 vaccine clinical trials on children should be stopped.
2. The Covid-19 vaccination for children should not be rolled out even if vaccines are given EUA for restricted use, and no vaccines, currently under trial, to be given EUA.
3. Immediate reopening of schools and colleges without any delay or restrictions as advised by experts.
4. No testing of asymptomatic children at school or home
5. No experimental and unapproved drugs should be used in the treatment of children who test positive and/or have Influenza Like Illness (ILI) rather children should be subject to standard of care using proven, tested and repurposed drugs and Ayush protocols under an Integrated Medicine Healthcare approach. It is our experience that experimental drugs have proved harmful for adults in the 1st and 2nd wave.
6. No testing, tracing, quarantine at mass level either routinely or as part of job, earning activity, entry to certain places or for travel as has been scientifically advised once community transmission has set in.

Indian Bar Association (IBA) has sent its Letter of Representation on October 8, 2021 to Hon’ble Prime Minister, Hon’ble Home Minister, Hon’ble Health Minister, Hon’ble Chief Ministers Hon’ble Health Ministers of all the states of India

While IBA is in full agreement with the facts shared in the letter by Doctors for Truth and Civil Society, it has called for:

1. Immediate direction to C.B.I. for investigation and prosecution under Section 409, 420, 115, 109, 323, 511, 120(B) etc. of Indian Penal Code and provisions of Prevention of Corruption Act against Dr. RandeepGuleria, and others for misuse and fraud on power in:
   i) Giving Emergency Use Authorization for Children’s Vaccines, when there is no emergency as there is no serious threat to children;
   ii) Running false narratives and conspiracy theories to create fear in the mind of parents, children and teachers about Covid-19, when children are most safe and not having any serious risk from infection from SARS-CoV-2.
2. Immediately directing investigation about corruption being done to give undeserving advantage of around Rs. 80,000 Crores to children’s Vaccine manufacturers.
3. Immediate direction for stopping any process for including children’s corona vaccines in National Immunization Programme.

THE CONSTITUTIONAL COURT OF EUROPE’S SLOVENIA STAYS THE GOVERNMENT MANDATE OF VACCINATION OF EMPLOYEES

• European Police Forcehas challenged Government’s vaccine mandate and Constitutional Court has slapped the Government with an injunction order
• Several Indian public servants have welcomed this judgment
• Great set back to vaccine syndicate and corrupt Government officials
  
  Courtesy: Slovenia TimesIn aground breaking move against vaccine syndicate’s sinister plan to enslave the people and public servants by making vaccination mandatory, the Nine Judge Bench of Constitutional Court of Slovenia, Europe has stayed the Government’s mandate for its employees to get vaccinated.The said mandate was challenged by several groups of civil servants including PSS police trade union.The court disagreed with the government’s claim that the challenged regulation was the only means to guarantee workers’ rights to a safe and healthy environment.Court held that, if the challenged regulation had been implemented and it later turned out it was unlawful or unconstitutional and would have to be annulled, the court said that‘hard to repair’ consequences could emerge for those employees who did not meet the PC condition or exceptions thereof.The court also noted that any vaccination is a lasting and irreversible measure for each individual and that in the case of the PC rule mandate, could go against the individual’s will. Thus it did not accept the government’s position that the regulation was of a temporary nature.The police trade union expects that the final decision of the court will be similar to the one taken by the court now.“We believe the decision puts up a mirror to the government due to the actions of which we are facing the country clearly regressing on fundamental legal and democratic standards,” Cvetko said.They believe the government should be the first to respect the constitution. “If not, it means the rights of all the citizens, that is including police officers, are under threat.”The Union expects the government to take decisions affecting the rights of all employees in the country in a more prudent way in the future and in the spirit of social partnership.The Union welcomed the decision, with its boss RokCvetko saying that the court prevented the government from encroaching on human rights and freedoms, not only of police officers but also of other state administration employees and other citizens.[Courtesy: The Slovenia Times]Link:      https://sloveniatimes.com/top-court-stays-pc-rule-for-civil-servants/

  Following landmark judgments are passed worldwide, by the Constitution loving and brilliant judges, against the vaccines, RT-PCR Test and Mask Mandates:

i) Darris Friend Vs. City of Gainesville Case No. 01-2021-CA-2412.

View the Judgment here 

ii) Registrar General Vs. State of Meghalaya 2021 SCC OnLineMegh 130.

View the Judgment here 

iii) Re Dinthar Incident Vs. State of Mizoram 2021 SCC OnLineGau 1313.

View the Judgment here

iv) Margarida Ramos De Almeida 1783/20.7T8PDL.L1-3.

View the Judgment here

The other landmark judgments preserving and protecting the one’s personal autonomy and right to choose or refuse medicines are as under;

i)Common Cause v. Union of India (2018) 5 SCC 1.

ii) ArunaRamachandraShanbaug v. Union of India, (2011) 4 SCC 454.

iii)S. Puttuwamy v. Union of India (2017) 70 SCC 7.

iv) Montgomerry v. Lanarshire Health Board[2015] UK SC 11.

v) Webster v. Burton Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust[2017] EWCA Civ 62.

vi)Airedale N.H.S. Trust v. Bland(1993) 1 All ER 821 [9 Judge bench] (followed in India).

vii) OsbertKhaling v. State of Manipur2021 SCC OnLine Mani 234.

viii) MadanMili v. UOI 2021 SCC OnLineGau 1503.

ix) Varghese v. Union of India2020 SCC OnLineKar 2825.

x) Master Haridaan Kumar (Minor through Petitioners Anubhav Kumar and Mr. AbhinavMukherji) v. Union of India,P.(C) 343/2019 & CM Nos.1604-1605/2019.

xi) Baby Veda Kalaan& Others v. Director of Education & Others P.(C) 350/2019 & CM Nos. 1642-1644/2019. 

YouTube & Google slapped with Rs. 1000 Crores compensation and contempt notice, for acting against the law and the Constitution in order to help the vaccine syndicate.

The notice is sent by renowned Social Activist and Awaken India Movement’s member Shri. Virendra Singh through his advocate.

YouTube has deleted videos of many researchers, doctors, activists and citizens which were regarding the frauds, malpractices and illegalities by the vaccine syndicate. Also, the videos were regarding awareness of public about the fatal side effects.

Recently German High Court fined YouTube with 1,00,000 Euros. In another case of misinformation campaign, the U.S. Court recorded the guilt of Glaxo Smith Kline where the company agreed to pay $ 3 Billion (around Rs. 2278 Crore).

The present notice sent by Adv. Abhishek Mishra says that the act of YouTube is not only against the Constitution of India and binding judgment of Supreme Court and High Court but also against the United Nation’s Universal Declaration of Bioethics and Human Rights, 2005 and International Covenant on Civil & Political Rights.

YouTube and Google are said to have joined the conspiracy to remove the information exposing malpractices of vaccine syndicate and additionally running a misinformation campaign to promote the vaccine as safe and the ‘only solution’ to cure Covid-19 infection.

That, YouTube involved in a conspiracy to suppress the data and run only one false narrative that vaccines are safe and only solution. In furtherance of the said sinister plan, YouTube at their own have uploaded many videos of several‘captured’ doctors to spread misinformation that ‘vaccines are completely safe and the only available complete solution against the Covid-19.

Falsity of its advertisements, interviews, false narratives and conspiracy theories have been exposed from the following;

(i) Vaccine is not a solution against corona since people who are getting two doses of vaccine are also infected with corona and some of them have died.

Link:

1. https://drive.google.com/file/d/1gFR9YyJnjxTu3-Q-D2uG-PmF7uAG4cDp/view?usp=sharing
2. https://theprint.in/health/at-least-60-delhi-doctors-have-died-in-2nd-covid-wave-families-are-left-to-pick-up-pieces/661353/
3. https://www.ndtv.com/india-news/dr-kk-aggarwal-ex-chief-of-india-medical-association-ima-dies-of-covid-19-coronavirus-2443827

(ii) Vaccines are not safe at all and vaccines are having several side effects including death.

Link:

1. https://drive.google.com/file/d/1uikc1a6_KDzUx7HNLrfwaI1NJRt0D_YP/view?usp=sharing
2. https://u.pcloud.link/publink/show?code=kZ03dwXZcrC28I987y41sJlCLpBSUbgJHz07

(iii) The immunity developed in the person due to his/her coming in contact of SARS-CoV-2 is far superior than the vaccines. It is at least 13 times superior than the immunity developed due to vaccines

Link:

Natural immunity 13 times more effective than vaccine immunity

https://youtu.be/6v5VrpgXPm4

However, YouTube runs unilateral and false narrative and have always tried its level best to suppress and conceal the true information from common people. This is in fact an offence of luring the people to take medicine by misrepresenting the public at large. It is an offence punishable under section 420 r/w 120(B) & 340 of I.P.C.

That Hon’ble Meghalaya High Court in Registrar General, High Court of Meghalaya Vs. State of Meghalaya 2021 SCC OnLineMegh 130, ruled by High Court as under;

“Thus, by use of force or through deception if an unwilling capable adult is made to have the „flu vaccine would be considered both a crime and tort or civil‟ wrong.”  

In the notice sent by Social Activist Virendra Singh the YouTube, Google are called upon to;

33.That the offences committed by You Noticee  are continuing ones and my client’s defamation is still going on. 

34. Hence, you are hereby called upon to;

 (i) Publish an apology on Facebook / Youtube / Twitter.
(ii) Pay my client a compensation of Rs. 1000 Crores for defamation through Demand Draft(DD) within 7 days of receipt of this notice.
(iii) Remove restriction and restore the videos forthwith.
(iv) Immediately stopping the misinformation campaign run by you with ulterior motives to help the vaccine mafias and cheat the public and thereby putting citizens’ life into jeopardy.
(v) Immediately stopping the Contempt of Hon’ble Supreme Court and Hon’ble various High Courts in India.
(vi) To immediately start respecting & following the Constitution of India and our country’s domestic laws and also to act as per United Nations Universal Declaration on Bioethics, 2005 & International Covenant on Civil & Political Rights.

The notice also states that, the notice is independent of and given by reserving the issuer’s rights to initiate criminal prosecutions under sec. 499, 500, 501, r/w 120(B), 34 etc. of Indian Penal Code and under Section 12 of Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 r/w Article 129, 215 of the Constitution of India in the competent courts and even if YouTube pays compensation amount of Rs. 1,000 Crores will not permit them in law, for claiming discharge or exoneration from prosecution.

United States’Florida Court’s judgment against mandatory vaccination is a slap on Vaccine Syndicate and corrupt Government.

• The falsity and dishonesty of State Government exposed.
• Indian Bar Association welcomes the judgment as being protector of fundamental rights of the citizen.
• S. Court said that no such attempt to encroach the private autonomy of a citizen, is permissible under law.
• Citizen has a right to refuse unwanted treatment.
• Court has granted injunction against the American Government.
• It will also be a tight slap upon the corrupt and dishonest officers, leaders and employers in India who are forcing the public to get vaccinated.

Florida:- In a welcoming development against the vaccine mandate, the United States’s Florida Court passed a judgment against Government and protected the petitioner.

The court observed;

“10. Florida law provides that citizens have the right to refuse unwanted medical treatments. In re Guardianship of Browning, 568 So.2d 4, 11 (Fla. 1990) (holding that “a competent person has the constitutional right to choose or refuse medical treatment, and that right extends to relevant decisions concerning one’s health”).

3. The City did not put on any evidence, at all, at the injunction hearing. Without any evidence, the Court is unable to consider whether the Vaccine Mandate serves a compelling interest through the least restrictive means, whether the Vaccine Mandate meets a strict scrutiny test, a rational basis test, or whether it meets any other standard. The City did not file any affidavits or declarations, did not submit any documentary evidence, and did not call any witnesses.
4. For the reasons set forth below, the Plaintiffs’ Emergency Petition for Injunctive Relief is GRANTED.

Application of the Right to Privacy to the Vaccine Mandate.

11. Federal law holds that compelled physical intrusion into the human body is an invasion of bodily integrity that implicates significant, constitutionally protected privacy interests. Missouri v. McNeely, 569 U.S. 141, 143 (2013).
12. The City’s Vaccine Mandate requires City employees to receive a complete dose of the COVID-19 vaccines. These vaccinations are administered through intramuscular injection. The City’s Vaccine Mandate requires a compulsory vaccination procedure that can reasonably be considered a form of medical treatment and/or a medical procedure, and thus, this mandate implicates the City employees’ fundamental right to privacy.
13. If a challenged law implicates Florida’s right to privacy, the burden shifts to the government to prove that the law furthers a compelling state interest in the least restrictive way —also known as the “strict scrutiny” standard. Gainesville Woman Care, LLC v. State, 210 So. 3d 1243, 1252-1253 (Fla. 2017); see also, Green v. Alachua County, 2021 WL 2387983 at *3.
14. This “strict scrutiny” standard applies equally to constitutional challenges in instances when the government seeks to enforce laws, and also, in instances when the government employer seeks to enforce workplace policies. See City of N. Miami v. Kurtz, 653 So. 2d 1025, 1028 (Fla. 1995).
15. If the government fails to put on evidence of its compelling state interest, as the City failed to do here, the Court is not required to (and, in fact, cannot) make factual findings that the government has any compelling state interest. Green, 2021 WL 2387983 at *3 (“When the government fails to offer evidence to demonstrate a compelling state interest, the trial court then is absolved of having to make any finding to that effect”). In the instant case, the City failed to put on any evidence that the Vaccine Mandate serves a compelling state interest or that the Vaccine Mandate was the least restrictive means to accomplish that interest.
16. The City’s Vaccine Mandate facially interferes with its employees’ right to refuse unwanted medical treatments and/or procedures, implicates Plaintiffs’ fundamental right to privacy, and is “presumptively unconstitutional.” Gainesville Woman Care, LLC., 210 So. 3d at 1245; and Green, 2021 WL 2387983 at *5.
17. The City had an opportunity to present evidence that would show that this Vaccine Mandate was the least restrictive means to meet a compelling government interest. The City did not do that and, in fact, did not present any evidence, at all. Therefore, the Court is required to find that the City failed to meet its burden of proving that the Vaccine Mandate furthers a compelling state interest in the least restrictive way. See Gainesville Woman Care, 210 So. 3d at 1260-61; Green, 2021 WL 2387983 at *3.

Elements for an Injunction

19. When a law is challenged on privacy grounds, the Court must first make a single, threshold do novo inquiry whether the challenged law invades an individual’s right to privacy. Green, 2021 WL 2387983 at *2. This court has conducted that inquiry and has determined that the challenged policy invades and/or implicates the Plaintiffs’ constitutionally protected right to privacy.
20. In other words, having determined that the City’s Vaccine Mandate implicates Plaintiffs’ privacy rights (and with no showing of a compelling interest demonstrated by the City), this Court is required to presume that the Plaintiffs have adequately demonstrated the four elements required for this Court to order the requested injunctive relief: likelihood of success on the merits, lack of an adequate legal remedy, irreparable harm, and the public and private interests at stake. Id.”

Health Minister Mansukh Mandaviya served with the Contempt Notice

Health Minister Mansukh Mandaviyahas beencalled upon to immediately remove the members from the decision-making board, Task Force, etc. who are associated directly or indirectly with the vaccine and pharma mafia or getting funds from black listed entities such as Program for Appropriate Technology in Health (PATH), Bill &Melinda Gates Foundation(BMGF), Public Health Foundation of India (PHFI) etc.

As per law laid down by the Supreme Court, any person sitting in a Government body and who is authorized to take a decision should not have any direct or indirect relations with the beneficiary companies.

If any decision was taken by the committee of such members then the saiddecision stands vitiated because of pecuniary bias.
The persons spotted are Dr. BalramBhargav, Dr. V. K. Paul, Gagandeep Kang, Dr. RandeepGuleria etc.

The notice also asked Shri. Mansukh Mandaviya to recall, withdraw, quash and set aside all recommendations, suggestions, rules, mask mandates et al. given by such disqualified members and  lodge F.I.R. against the accused members who provided wrong and nonsensical recommendations for ulterior purposes of giving wrongful profits to vaccine and pharma companies and loss to 135 crore Indians.

The subject of the Notice reads thus;

To forthwith stop the contempt of law laid down by Hon’ble Supreme Court and follow the law and binding precedents of Constitution Bench of Hon’ble Supreme Court, and Hon’ble High Courts more particularly in the case of ;

(i)       Mineral Development Ltd. Vs State (1960) 2 SCR 609.

(ii)     A.K. Kraipak Vs. Union of India (1969) 2 SCC 262,

(iii)    State of Punjab Vs. Davinder Pal Singh Bhullar (2011) 14 SCC 770,

(iv)   Suresh PalandeVs. Govt. of Maharashtra 2015 SCC OnLineBom 6775.

AND TO FORTHWITH;

• Remove the persons/bureaucrats, members of the Task Force etc. from any decision-making process related with remedies and solutions regarding Covid-19 pandemic, who are directly or indirectly connected with any entity, NGO or Board that receives funds from Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Rockefeller Foundation, PATH, PHFI, where sole agenda is to reap profits for the vaccine manufacturers;
• Issue immediate direction as per law laid down by the Constitution Bench of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Mineral Development Ltd. Vs State (1960) 2 SCR 609,there by directing to all authorities not to follow, the illegal, unconstitutional, unscientific and nonsensical circulars and orders based on the recommendations and suggestions regarding vaccination, masks, RT-PCR test etc., issued by these disqualified members;
• Issue directions for forthwith removal and withdrawl of all the false, misleading and illegal advertisements, caller tunes, Questions and Answers (FAQs) published by the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare on the basis of recommendations given by members who are in the disqualified category as per law laid down by Hon’ble Supreme Court.
• Immediate direction to protect the rights of covid cured citizens who are safest person as their immunity is proved to be 13 times better than fully vaccinated people and the citizen who are covid cured or having natural immunity developed due to contract with corona are entitled for relief from covid appropriate behavior before vaccinated people.

(v)   Issue specific directions after enquiry to all the authorities to not to allow to take part in any of the meetings or decision making process the following person who are in the category of disqualified:

 (i) Prof. K. Shrinath Reddy,

 (ii) Dr. Cherry Gagandeep Kang,

(iii) Dr. Balram Bhargava,

(iv) Shri. V.K. Paul,

(v) Dr. SoumyaSwaminathan ,

(vi) Dr. RandeepGuleria,

(vii) Dr. K. Vijay Raghvan,

(viii) Dr. N.K. Arora ;

and others as mentioning in para 14 of this notice.

(vi) Direction to prohibit the members of ICMR, PATH, PHFI, BMGF etc., who found prima facie guilty by the Parliamentary Committee in 72^ndReport and based on the evidences given in this notice from participating any board or body dealing with the corona management.

(vii)   Direct prosecution u/s 51(b) of Disaster Management Act, 2005 against all the entities and all the persons who are directly or indirectly forcing the people to take vaccines or restricting their entries on the ground of non-vaccination.

(viii) Directions to authorities to not to publish misleading advertisements, slogans and publish correct fact that vaccines are not completely safe but having many side effects and vaccines are not solution or there is no guarantee that citizens will not get corona and the person taking vaccine may die due to corona.

(ix)    Directions to authorities to issue circulars to all State Governments and Central Government entities to not to conduct RTPCR/RAT Test of asymptotic and healthy persons.

(x)Direction to authorities to not to draw any conclusions or not to take any policy decisions of lockdown or quarantine on the basis of RTPCR/RAT Test and only use the Gold Standard test of ‘Virus Culture’ for taking any policy decisions or recommendations etc.

(xi)     Give directions to all authorities to issue circulars, advertisements et al to make public aware that:

(a) Natural immunity caused due to Contract with Covid-19 is more than13 times better than the person fully vaccinated and such people are most safest persons. They will not get corona again and they cannot spread infection.

(b)  Wearing mask is voluntary and there is no scientific proof that masks can prevent infection. And the healthy or asymptomatic people need not to wear mask. Also publish the scientific studies regarding damage caused to the lungs and also other side effects of wearing masks.

(xii) Give wide publicity and proper support to the following result oriented remedies and treatments which are having far more efficacy than vaccines and not having no side effects with zero deaths as compared with many side effects and deaths due to vaccines:-

1. i)Naturopathy’s – Three step Fluid Diet as formulated by Dr. Biswaroop Roy Choudhary and verified by National Institute of Naturopathy, Pune.
2. ii)Anandia’sAyurvedic ‘K’ medicine as verified & approved by the State Government of Andhra Pradesh and confirmed by the Hon’ble Andhra Pradesh High Court.

iii) Ayurvedic& yoga treatment as suggested by Baba Ramdev.

2. The point wise frauds and issues with proofs exposed by the sender of Notice as under;

2.1. Duty of every citizen under Article 51 (a) of the Constitution of India.

2.2. ICMR survey exposed the non-efficacy of vaccines and also falsity of Health Ministry’s claim.

2.3. Any person including Ministers, who are receiving salary is public servant and he is bound to act fairly, impartially and only for the welfare of the nation. any deviation and misappropriation of public funds by misuse of power is punishable under Section 409 of IPC having punishment up to life imprisonment.

2.4. Law of disqualification of any person from taking part in process, who is interested in someone’s profit and their agenda.

2.5. Even if there is a single member who is partial and interested and there are other members who are impartial then also it vitiates and invalidate their recommendations, suggestions and all actions.

2.6. Failure to follow the law of disqualification and taking interested person makes such authority and Ministers liable for action under section 166, 218, 219,511, 120 (B) & 34 etc. of IPC and contempt of Supreme Court and various High Courts in India.

2.7. The Person/Minister joining the unlawful acts subsequently is also liable for same offences as that of principal offender.

2.8. Proofs exposing links of members of National Task Force with vaccine mafia Bill Gates and Others.

2.9. Conflicts of Interest and also criminal conspiracy in India’s Public Health System.

2.10. Unlawful & unconstitutional partnership or collaboration with LLP or any private entity like PHFI, PATH et al.

2.11. As per Supreme Court judgment the honest members of body or Task Force who opposed the wrong, illogical and irrational decisions of the Task Force should not be prosecuted. But the members who did not opposed the unlawful activities should be arrested and don’t deserve bail.

2.12. Misuse and fraud on power by corrupt, intellectually dishonest members of task force in giving recommendations, suggestion and in formulating rules which will cause wrongful gain to vaccine companies and having dangerous impact of various losses to citizen including loss of life and life time disabilities, loss of business and livelihood.

2.13. Dishonesty and fraud in bringing mask mandate.

2.14. Fraud and dishonest decisions of RTPCR Test of asymptomatic persons.

2.15. Intentionally & deliberately suppressing the result of Sero survey which proved that around 70% of Indians have got natural immunity due to contract with Covid Sars-2 and they are the safest person and they cannot be asked to follow restrictions or to take vaccines because the immunity developed due to contract with corona (Covid-19) is more than 13 times better than the immunity developed due to vaccines.

2.16. Fraudulently, corruptly &malafidely running the false narratives and conspiracy theories of asymptomatic patients without any scientific data and proofs.

2.17. Study and reasoning on dangerous viruses found in healthy people.

2.18. Conspiracy and fraud to suppress the economical and highly effective medicines and remedies such as Ivermectin, Vitamin-D, Hydroxychloroquine, Naturopathy, Ayurveda et al. to show that there is no remedy and medicines to cure corona and this was done to serve their ulterior purposes of getting emergency use authorization (EUA) to the vaccines whose clinical trials are not completed and there were no proofs of its efficacy and its side effects were not studied properly as mandated in medical science.

2.19. Attempt to violate fundamental rights of citizens by forcing them to take vaccines and committing offences under section 323, 336, 115, 302, 304 etc., of I.P.C.

2.20. Misappropriation of around thousands of crores on vaccines and RTPCR tests.

2.21. Conspiracy to bring vaccine mandate for children’s to give wrongful profit of thousands of crores to vaccine companies.

2.22. All the report and recommendation of the ICMR and other bodies cannot be the basis for any conclusion or recommendations because they are based on the result of test of RT-PCR at 35 Cycle Threshold (CT) which is having false positive rate of 97%. Therefore, any recommendation about efficacy of vaccines or lockdown or anything is not permissible on the basis of the results of RT-PCR Test.

2.23. Parliamentary Committee’s 72nd report exposing corruption by ICMR and other officials involved in conspiracy to help vaccine syndicate sponsored by Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and also responsible for offences of murder of female children. Supreme Court judgment upholds the evidentiary value of Parliamentary CommitteeReport.

2.24. Recommendation of the Parliamentary Committee asking for investigation and legal action against Bill Gates and officials of ICMR.

2.25. [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 World Health Organisation’s (WHO) policies were influenced by vaccine manufacturers who benefited from the pandemic virus. Swine flu, Bird flu ‘never happened’: Probe into H1N1 ‘false pandemic’.

2.26. Fake Epidemics Created in the Past due to RT-PCR Misuse.

2.27. [A] National Technical Advisory Group on Immunization (NTAGI) recommendations vitiated in view of law laid down by Hon’ble Supreme Court in A. K. Kraipak’s case (supra) because of having disqualified members.

[B] Dishonesty and falsity in NTAGI’s declaration on conflict of interest.

2.28. Direction for enquiry as to under what provision of law the government had given a funding of Rs. 100 crores to PHFI and enquiry as to where and how the said funds were utilized.

2.29. Deliberate attempt to suppress the most effective Three Step Fluid Diet given by world’s renowned naturopath Dr. Biswaroop Roy Chaudhary which is verified by  Government of India’s AYUSH Ministry’s National Institute of Naturopathy Pune and having far better result than vaccines and having no side effects and Zero deaths.

2.30. Co- Conspirator, Social & main stream media’s role to help the accused to complete their sinister plan.

2.31. In addition to above said offences, the accused ‘print and social media’ persons stopping, prohibiting or deleting the information are also liable for punishment under section 12 of Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 r/w  Article 129 and 215 of Constitution of India for acting in willful disregard and defiance of binding precedent of Hon’ble Supreme Court and various High Courts in India.

2.32. Act of stopping, hiding, removing, suppressing, concealing and twisting material facts from any patient/citizen and leaving him no option but to adopt the option of dangerous vaccines is a preparation of offence mass murder of the people at large as defined under section 115, 511 of IPC.

2.33. 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.

Legal Notice served upon Facebook claiming compensation of Rs. 500 crores for its act of deleting the posts regarding adverse effects of corona vaccines

Recently, in a case against YouTube, the German Higher Regional Court has fined YouTube with 1,00,000 Euros after it wrongly deleted a user’s video which showed massive pandemic lockdown protests in Switzerland, and then failed to reinstate the video ‘immediately’ after the court ordered it to do so.

The notice issued by Adv. Tanveer Nizam on behalf of renowned Activist and Naturopath Smt. Nisha Koiri mentions that the deleted posts were based on correct facts and as a part of his client’s duty under article 51 A of the Constitution of India. Therefore, deleting the post is violative of Article 14,19 and 21 of the Constitution of India.

As per the Constitution of India and as per specific laws laid down by the Supreme Court and Delhi High Court, every Indian has freedom of speech and expression. The citizens also have the fundamental rights to know the correct information. As per article 18 of the Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights 2005 and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) the discussion and opinions from all parts of the society need to be welcomed and promoted.

The said article reads thus;
Article 18 – Decision-making and addressing bioethical issues

1. Professionalism, honesty, integrity and transparency in decision-making should be promoted, in particular declarations of all conflicts of interest and appropriate sharing of knowledge. Every endeavor should be made to use the best available scientific knowledge and methodology in addressing and periodically reviewing bioethical issues.
2. Persons and professionals concerned and society as a whole should be engaged in dialogue on a regular basis.
3. Opportunities for informed pluralistic public debate, seeking the expression of all relevant opinions, should be promoted.

Article 19 of the ICCPR Convention reads as follows:

(1) Everyone shall have the right to hold opinions without interference;

(2) Everyone shall have the right to freedom of expression, this right shall include freedom to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds, regardless of frontiers, either orally, in writing or in print, in the form of art or through any other media of his choice.”

India has ratified the ICCPR. Section 2(d) read with 2(f) of the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993 clarifies ‘human rights’ to include the rights guaranteed by the ICCPR.

Supreme Court of India had time and now ruled that freedom of expression is meant to include the right of all citizens to speak, publish and express their views. The freedom of the press embodies the right of the people to read.

Noncompliance with the law laid down by the Supreme Court makes the Facebook head Mark Zuckerberg and other office bearers of the Facebook liable for action under the Contempt of Courts Act where the punishment is up to six months imprisonment.

Deleting a post without lawful reason amounts to defamation as per Indian laws and it is punishable under section 500, 501 of Indian Penal Code where punishment is two years imprisonment.

The Facebook cannot act like a Judge of a Court and decide as to whose information is correct or wrong. The act of running only one narratives in favor of vaccines and compelling citizens to take these vaccines, also makes the Facebook liable to face the charges of attempt to commit murder, if the side effects of vaccines are suppressed and if the person is compelled to take vaccines by suppressing data to mislead the said person and if the said person dies due to side effects of vaccines, then Mark Zuckerberg and other office bearers of the Facebook are liable for action under sections 302, 115, 52, 120(B), 34 of Indian Penal Code and they may face the death penalty for mass murders and genocide.

Recently, in a case against YouTube, the German Higher Regional Court fined YouTube with 1,00,000 Euros after it wrongly deleted a user’s video which showed massive pandemic lockdown protests in Switzerland – and then failed to reinstate the video ‘immediately’ after the court ordered it to do so.

The excerpts from the news article are produced here for ready reference:
“Recently YouTube has been fined 100,000 euros by the German Higher Regional Court at Dresden after it wrongly deleted a user’s video which showed massive pandemic lockdown protests in Switzerland – and then failed to reinstate the video ‘immediately’ after the court ordered it to do so on April 20.

Meanwhile, a so-called independent fact-checker website FactCheck.org was exposed to be funded by the same $1.9 billion vaccine lobby group that it is supposed to check. The site is a Facebook partner whose articles are used to censor critical voices on the social media platform. It is headed by the former CDC director, which is again a conflict of interest.

In a shocking revelation came to light that Google and USAID funded research conducted by Peter Daszak’sEcoHealth Alliance – a controversial group which has openly collaborated with the Wuhan Institute of Virology on “killer” bat coronavirus research – for over a decade.

In a move against this Big Tech censorship of free speech, Poland is planning to make censoring of social media accounts illegal.

“Algorithms or the owners of corporate giants should not decide which views are right and which are not,” said the prime minister of Poland, Mateusz Morawiecki. “There can be no consent to censorship.”

Read the full article here:
https://greatgameindia.com/youtube-pandemic-fine-german-court/

COURT ISSUED NOTICE TO JAIL AUTHORITY CALLING THEIR EXPLANATION ON PETITION SEEKING PROSECUTION OF DOCTORS AND POLICE OFFICERS INVOLVED IN FORCED VACCINATION OF VICTIM IN JUDICIAL CUSTODY

Victims prayed for prosecution of Doctor and concerned Police officer under section 336,323,319,321,307,166,109,120(B)&34 of Indian Penal Code, under Atrocities Act,section 145(2) of Maharashtra Police Act, section 51,54,55,56,58 of Disaster Management Act, 2005.

The victim belonging to Scheduled Caste Community was vaccinated against his will and without informing him with the dangerous side effects of the vaccines. He claimed Rs. 5 Crores interim compensation

If victim suffers death after vaccination, then the concerned doctor and other officers will also be charged for murder as per section 302 of IPC.

Today the Bombay’s Sessions Court Judge issued notice to jail authorities on a petition filed by the accused belonging to Scheduled Caste Community, before Sessions Court alleging his forced vaccination by police and doctors despite his refusal.

The Sessions Court today passed the following order;

“APP Mrs. Hire for state present. Accused produced from JC. Advocate Nilesh Ojha for accused present. ………………………He also filed application for appropriate direction to Jail Authority and investigate and launch prosecution against the person responsible (for) force (d) vaccination of accused. TOR. APP to say and call say of Supdt of Jail. The order be communicate the Supdt of Jail on email.  Adjd for reply and compliance on 27.8.21.”

The prayers in the petition read thus;
i)Call a report from Inspector-General of Police (IGP) and In- charge of Arthur Road, Jail;

ii)Take appropriate action under Section 220 of IPC against concerned police official for handcuffing the Applicant-accused without any judicial order as has been mandated by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Re: M. P. Dwivedi’s case (1996) 4 SCC 152.

iii)  Forward a reference of Contempt to Hon’ble Supreme Court against guilty police officer and doctors involved in wilful disregard and defiance of Hon’ble Supreme Court direction in the case of Common Cause Vs. Union of India (2018) 5 SCC 1, which prohibits forced medication against the will of a person;

iv) Direct appropriate action under provisions of Prevention of (SC & ST) AtrocitiesAct as the victim belongs to Schedule Caste Community.

v) Direct competent authorities to initiate prosecution under Section 52, 166, 336, 319, 321, 307 r/w 109, 120(B) & 34 of Indian Penal Code and Section 51, 54, 55, 56, 58 of Disaster Management Act, 2005 against person, police officers, doctors and anyone who are  directly or indirectly involved in the crime by their act of commission and omission in acting against the directives of the Central Government and unlawfully doing the forced vaccination of the Applicant-accused against his will and without explaining him the death causing side effects of the vaccines and putting the life of applicant in danger.

vi)Direct the authorities to not to force the Applicant-accused to take second or booster dose of vaccines;

vii)  If subsequently any life threatening side effects occur then the concerned doctors and police officials be prosecuted under Section 302, 120(B) & 34, 52 of Indian Penal Code.

viii) Direct the State Government to fix the responsibility on officials for granting adequate compensation to the Applicant-accused;

ix)Give specific direction to the jail authority to insure the safety and protection of the applicant-accused and he shall not be subjected to any pressure for his complaint against the jail authorities and if anything happens to the Applicant then this complaint be treated as his dying declaration and the concerned officials be prosecuted;

x)Pass any other order which this Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case;

xi) Pass appropriate direction regarding interim compensation of Rs. 5 Crores to be paid by the State of Maharashtra to Accused;   

As per the Central Government’s directives vaccination is purely voluntary and not mandatory.

Supreme Court of India & various High Courts have ruled that direct or indirect pressure to take vaccine, is violative of Article 14,19,21 of Constitution of India and it is also a criminal offence which makes the victim liable for compensation.

Based on the scientific proofs the Courts have also ruled that, the vaccines are no guarantee of any protection from Covid-19. The vaccinated people can also get infected with corona and they can also be superspreaders. Therefore,extending any facility or advantage solely to the vaccinated people, will be violation of Article 14 of the Constitution.

While quashing unlawful circulars of the government which give priority to the vaccinated people the court said that, the decision of the state government is not based on the ‘intelligent differentia’thereby meaning that, the decision of state government is a foolish one having no logic or acceptable reasoning.

If any victim is unlawfully vaccinated by concealing the side effects of the vaccine and without obtaining the written consent of the said person, then the state is bound to compensate such victim. The concerned, official and doctors are also liable for punishment under section 336, 323, 319, 321, 166, 188, 109, 307, 120 (B) & 34 of IPC.

If the said person dies due to forced vaccination or any side effects of the vaccination then such Doctors and other official will face prosecution under murder charges of section 302 etc of IPC.

As per section 2 of Epidemic Disease Act, 1897 and section 12 & 13 of National Disaster Management Act, 2005,it is the duty of the state Government to provide appropriate compensation to every citizen who is victim of any steps taken by the state such as lockdown, restriction on opening of office etc.

Section 2 of Epidemic Disease Act 1897 reads thus;

“Power to take special measures and prescribe regulations as to dangerous epidemic disease.—(1) When at any time the 2 [State Government] is satisfied that 2 [the State] or any part thereof is visited by, or threatened with, an outbreak of any dangerous epidemic disease, the 3 [State Government], if 4 [it] thinks that the ordinary provisions of the law for the time being in force are insufficient for the purpose, may take, or require or empower any person to take, such measures and, by public notice, prescribe such temporary regulations to be observed by the public or by any person or class of persons as 4 [it] shall deem necessary to prevent the outbreak of such disease or the spread thereof, and may determine in what manner and by whom any expenses incurred (including compensation if any) shall be defrayed.

Section 12 & 13 of National Disaster Management Act,2005 read thus;

“12. Guidelines for minimum standards of relief.— The National Authority shall recommend guidelines for the minimum standards of relief to be provided to persons affected by disaster, which shall include,—

(i) the minimum requirements to be provided in the relief camps in relation to shelter, food, drinking water, medical cover and sanitation;

(ii) the special provisions to be made for widows and orphans;

(iii) ex gratia assistance on account of loss of life as also assistance on account of damage to houses and for restoration of means of livelihood;

(iv) such other relief as may be necessary.

13.Relief in loan repayment, etc.—The National Authority may, in cases of disasters of severe magnitude, recommend relief in repayment of loans or for grant of fresh loans to the persons affected by disaster on such concessional terms as may be appropriate”.

No excuse is available to the Government because the Government is paying full salary to all the Government officials, leaders/ Ministers /MLAS/MPs etc. and it appears that everything is going smoothly for them except for the common man who is constantly struggling to earn his livelihood.

Hence, the Government cannot take any defence for not providing compensation to the common man.

In fact, it is responsibility, duty and obligation of all the Chief Ministers, Ministers, Prime Minister to provide compensation to all citizens who have suffered due to measures like lockdown.

Earlier in Pune Plague during the period of 1896 to 1918, the British Government provided compensation to the public for losses caused due to measures taken by British Government.

Related Link : –
https://indianexpress.com/article/research/how-oppressive-containment-measures-during-poona-plague-led-to-assassination-of-british-officer-6450775/

“The medical officers were supplied with cash advances and had instructions to pay compensation for any articles belonging to plague patients that may have been destroyed in the process.

“It was found at the beginning of the operations that rather too many articles were at times destroyed as rubbish. Orders were accordingly issued on March 26 to Officers commanding limewashing divisions to visit, if possible, all houses to be lime washed and to decide what should be destroyed in each. It was also laid down that when a property of any value to the owners was destroyed by limewashing party, the Officer commanding the division should note the approximate cost of replacing what had been destroyed in order that compensation might afterwards be paid. In practice nothing was destroyed after the first fortnight of the operations except in the presence of an officer,” reads the report.

It was at this backdrop that Bal Gangadhar Tilak wrote in Mahratta, his English newspaper: “Plague is more merciful to us than its human prototypes now reigning the city. The tyranny of the Plague Committee and its chosen instruments is yet too brutal to allow respectable people to breathe at ease.” No doubt that the regulations and measures as they were imposed in Pune were the most stringent among all the cities afflicted by the pandemic. In fact, Antony MacDonnel, Lieutenant-Governor of the North-Western Provinces, had observed in a July 1897 communique that “If the plague regulations had been enforced in any city of these provinces in the way in which …they were…enforced in Poona, there would have been bloodshed here.”

Butthe State officials of Independent Indiahave proven to be unfair and unjust, since theyare not granting any compensation to the citizens, but are involved in corrupt practices of acting on a one-sided narrative that is intended tofacilitate the massive, unlawful gains to the Vaccine Mafia.