"all is well" at mumbai high court

8/8/2019 "All is Well" At Mumbai High Court

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/all-is-well-at-mumbai-high-court 1/9

All is well at Mumbai Hi h Cour

An open letter to the

Chief Justice of Mumbai High court



“All is Well” at Mumbai High Court

By Uday Dandavate

Summary: An article, “Crisis of Character” written by Uday Dandavate created a

controversy due to a passing reference he made in the article to his struggles to secure

a probate for his father’s will from the testamentary department of the Mumbai High

Court. The Chief Justice of Mumbai High court instituted an inquiry to go into the

perception of corruption and concluded that there was no evidence of corruption in the

case. The Times of India, which took the issue public, has been slapped with a contempt

of court notice. In this article Uday appeals to the citizens of Mumbai, to come forward

with their own accounts of corrupt practices, without which, he says, very existence of

corruption will be denied and the whistle blowers will be punished.

________________________________________________________________

I am writing this open letter to the Chief Justice of Mumbai High court because I

am concerned that the issues raised in my article “Crisis of Character” have been

sidelined in the process and that the report of the investigation instituted by Hon.

Chief Justice has instead focused on falsifying my perception that my case was

delayed because there was expectation of speed money from the officers of the

Testamentary department of Mumbai High Court.

I have made very clear to the court’s vigilance officer that I waited to share my

experience until my case was resolved through the normal and painful process

that every citizen of our country is subjected to. I am glad that Hon. Chief Justice

took note of the report published in the Times of India.

I would like to clarify a few points related to the current controversy over my

father’s will so that the main purpose behind my article, that triggered thiscontroversy is not lost due to the turn it has taken as a result of coverage in the

media. During a time when acts of corruption in public life are being exposed in

the media on a regular basis, citizens are looking forward to the judiciary to deter,

stop and punish the corrupt. Here are my comments in response to a few

extracts of the report I have seen.



• First of all, I did not approach Times of India to start the

controversy, nor did the reporter contact me before publishing the

report. Everything printed in Times of India was based on a

conscientious reporter reading a paragraph printed in my article

“Crisis of Character” and writing the report based on his

interpretation and his own research of your website (which at the

time said that the application was still not resolved). He also

conducted his own investigation with other advocates in Mumbai

and received confirmation of existence of speed money racket in

the court.

• My article, “Crisis of Character”, published in Radical Humanist and

in Janata Weekly was my response to the corruption in

Commonwealth Games. As some of you may have read in the

original article, and as I explained to the vigilance officer of Mumbai

High Court, I do not have a personal grievance with regard to my

application for a probate. My grievance is with the lack of effective

mechanism to deter, stop and punish corrupt acts in various public

institutions.

• I was motivated to write the article about Commonwealth games

because I am pained that our national character has degenerated

to a point where we have accepted corruption as an unavoidable

part of life. This is appalling to me. I hold those who give speed

money as guilty as those who take bribes.

• In that article I briefly referred to my struggles to secure the probate

for my father’s will. I felt an utter sense of frustration for lack of clear

indication from my advocates of how much time it would take to

complete the process, and with the slow pace of processing of my

application by the court officials. Circumstantial conditions,

prompted me to believe that by not paying speed money, I was

subjected to delaying tactics.



• In the past I have personally confronted several government

officers for their delaying tactics in handling people’s cases and

therefore am very aware of and sensitive to any signs of work being

delayed in public institutions without satisfactory explanation of the

delay.

• In my written testimony to your investigating team, I have already

explained all the circumstantial reasons that led me to believe that

my probate was delayed because I did not pay speed money. I

clarified to the vigilance officer that nobody demanded a bribe

directly from me, yet many people, including some advocates told

me that paying speed money is a common practice in the

testamentary department of the Mumbai High court. In my case, the

corrupt act did not take place because I told my advocates to make

it clear to anyone who might expect speed money that I would not

be willing to give it. However, I did experience delay in processing

of my petition, compared to about six months estimated by my

lawyer in the beginning of the process. I received the probate five

years after my father’s death, or three years after it was filed.

• I have read a newspaper report in The Times of India, which refers

to a revelation made by unnamed advocates of Mumbai high court

to the reporter as, “Sources said that the clutch of lawyers who hold

sway over the testamentary department boast that they can get a

will probated in a month if the heir is willing to pay them Rs 50,000.

Other lawyers who occasionally take up matters relating to wills

complain that their case papers are often untraceable”.

• Another source has told me that at least one advocate has

indicated to the court’s vigilance officer during the inquiry that

he/she has grievances about the working of the Testamentary

Department. However it was difficult to produce evidence, as the

advocates who could provide evidence fear that their future work

will be hampered. Therefore, I do have a question to the



investigating team. Did any advocate testify to the vigilance officer

that he/she is aware of corrupt practices taking place in the court?

Was his/her testimony recorded? I can understand that the

conclusion of the report cannot depend a testimony that is not

supported by evidence. However, if advocates who have practiced

in the court for a long time make such observations, I would

assume that this testimony was brought to the notice of Hon. Chief

Justice who, is known to be vigilant about highest level of integrity

in the court.

• I would like to assure you that, there was no question of inaction,

apathy or lethargy from my end as suggested in the report as

reasons for the delay. I want to clarify that I paid the court fees to

my lawyer in 2006 with a check along with a full payment for legal

services for securing my father's probate and my mother's

succession certificate. So delay in payment of court fees, as

indicated in the report, did not occur from my end.

• The only communication I have received from my advocates that

has reference to any delay on their part was with regard to a bond

requested by the court for processing the application for my

mother's succession certificate, which was an entirely different

application (This information was shared with me much after the

bond was delivered to the court).

• A reference to my mother’s succession certificate was made on

December 18th, 2008 by my advocate through an email to me that

said, “Final objection/ requisition was raised by the department

which was cleared yesterday. The papers will go for final process of

preparing the draft succession certificate and then for sealing.”. The

succession certificate of my mother was subsequently issued,

whereas the probate for my father’s will continued to be held up in

the court- It was never explained to me by my attorney why it was

delayed.



• Your report refers to objections raised to my probate. I was not

shown contents of any objections by my advocates pertaining to my

father’s probate and I have not provided them any advice on what

the replies to those objections should be.

• In August 2010 I was told by my advocate that the probate was

ready with the registry and that I needed to pay Rs. 9000 for “all the

miscellaneous work in the matter including typing, photocopying,

removing objections from time to time.” This was the first time I

heard about any objections being raised and cleared. I wondered

then how were the objections cleared when I had not even provided

any explanations that would address the objections in the first

place.

• I saw objections as a delaying tactic and due to lack of clarification

from my lawyers despite my asking, I was left suspecting that either

this was a last minute attempt to get speed money from me or I

may have already been tricked into paying speed money. I had

clearly told my lawyers that the 9000 Rupees should be used only

for legal and legitimate services.

• I am not after the meager savings of my parents earned through a

lifetime of honest public life. My true inheritance is the legacy of my

parents -two freedom fighters and upright politicians- who devoted

their entire life to leading an impeccably clean public life. I try to live

up to the standards of conduct set by them. Therefore I proactively

gave clear instructions to my advocate that I would never pay a

bribe to secure my mother’s succession certificate and my father’s

probate.

• Despite clearly asking for an answer, till date I have not received a

clear confirmation from the advocates in response to my question

whether the money that I gave in good faith for administrative

purposes was used as speed money. In this context, I would like to

cite an advocate friend, who recently told me, “Normally we do not



even tell some of our clients how much money we have to give for

“Chai Pani” to the court clerks. We just account for it in our

estimated expenses.” No wonder the delay combined with a last

minute request for Rs. 9000 for clearing objections, led me to

believe that speed money was expected and my adamant stand

was leading to the delaying tactics.

• I would also like to quote a recent report in Pune Mirror of

December 6th, 2010, where advocate Amit Bhowmik who has

practiced in Mumbai High Court, has publicly claimed that there

exists a rate card of the money people have to pay to get their work

done in the court.

• For the past several decades, during the political life of my parents

hundreds of ordinary people have come to our house with

complaints of harassment by government officials, policemen, etc.,

I have learned over the years that raising objections is a common

practice for delaying the process and extorting bribes in

government offices. A comment by my lawyer, during early period

of my communication with him via an email further consolidated my

suspicion that there was an expectation for speed money behind

the delay. I quote him, “I further do not agree that the inefficiency

and corruption does not exist in India. It certainly does and if we do

not accept or admit this position then we are living in fool’s

paradise. At the same time, we are against such system and do

not encourage such practice and hence sometimes delay.” This

sentence has been hovering in mind and made me suspect

expectation of speed money.

• I have received specific reports from a source in Mumbai that since

Hon. Chief Justice instituted an inquiry, some of the agents who

were operating from inside the premises of the court have been

debarred from operating from there. If this is true, it is a very

encouraging and a positive outcome. I have also learned that large-



scale transfers of officials of the testamentary department have

taken place since the news broke out. Regardless of whether those

transfers were related to this case or not, the actions do convey a

message to the public that the department is being cleaned up by

the Chief Justice of Mumbai High Court.

• I want to repeat that the central issue of my article was “crisis of

character” amongst general public. The fact that the advocates who

have secretly admitted to the newspaper reporter existence of such

corruption in the testamentary department do not come forward to

testify, concerns me because, there isn’t a mechanism in place for

concerned citizens to raise their voice against corruption and

receive protection from being victimized.

• From this case I have formed a perception that it is the whistle

blower, who gets punished and the system of corruption may

continue unabated. I am very disheartened that instead of

recognizing the courage of a conscientious reporter of Times of

India, who has published comments from advocates who are not

willing to bail the cat themselves, a contempt of court action is

being taken against Times of India.

• The citizens, who have to face corruption in government offices on a routine

basis, expect decisive action from the judiciary to resolve their grievances.

Decisive actions in setting up transparent procedures and monitoring

systems will create greater confidence in people. Indeed the expectation

from people is that with your intervention efforts will be made to set in place

a system that will deter, stop and punish the corrupt. Saying that all is well in

the High court, will only erode the credibility of the investigation.

• I would like to assure the Hon. Chief justice that I do not have any

personal interest in writing my article, as my application for probate

and succession certification has already been approved. I do

however feel responsible, as a member of a family that fought for

India’s freedom and for maintaining a vigil for preserving integrity in



public life, to speak up against the corruption, even if you call my

observations “unfounded” due to lack of evidence. From my own

investigations, I know very well that my observations are not

misplaced. The credibility of the court is of immense importance to

every Indian, since that is one institution that people still look up to

in the midst of rampant corruption in public life. Just an apology

form the Times of India in response to a contempt of court order will

not help clear the simmering anger people have against the touts in

the premises of the courts who harass people on a daily basis.

• Ordinary citizens of Mumbai hope that this controversy will lead to

concrete action and they would feel the difference when they go to

the court the next time.

• I would like to quote the reaction of one of the ordinary citizens who

called me after reading the article in Times of India. In referring to

the famous phrase “Justice is Blind” he cited a Marathi proverb,

“Andhala Daltay Ani Kutra Pith Khatay.” (While the blind man grinds

the grain to wheat, a dog sits by the side and eats it.”)

• I have an appeal for the citizens of Mumbai and to the Advocates

practicing in the Mumbai High Court. If you did face a demand for

speed money or felt your request for timely resolution of a case was

delayed for not fulfilling an expectation for speed money, please

come forward and write to the Chief Justice of Mumbai High court.

You can also post your story on the website, http://ipaidabribe.com.

You owe that to your country and to yourself.

"all is well" at mumbai high court

Documents