Amit Shah trying to make justice speedier, but it’s still ‘Tareekh-pe-Tareekh’ in Gurugram court !

72-year-old lady’s Application of Restoration of civil suit pending for 7 years !!

Delhi Crown Crown

Gurugram: This week Union Home Minister Amit Shah got three key bills related to procedural laws passed in the Parliament, thus replacing the British-era IPC, CrPC and Evidence Act. The three new bills were brought in shape with the objective of making procedural laws simpler, speedier, and also bring in overall legal reforms in the country.

The “Bharatiya Nyaya (Second) Sanhita Bill (BNSS)” will replace the Indian Penal Code, 1860; the “Bharatiya Sakshya (Second) Bill (BSS)” will replace the Indian Evidence Act, 1872; and the “Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha (Second) Sanhita Bill (BNSSS)” will replace the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898.

While getting the three bills passed in the Parliament, Amit Shah had stated that the new laws will ensure end of “Tareekh pe Tareekh” era, and ensure a speedier and smoother justice to the victims.

But, in Gurugram a glaring case has come to the fore wherein a 72-year-old lady has been continuously making rounds of the District Courts for the past seven long years just to get her Civil Suit restored!

Plaintiff Munita Yadav (72), a resident of Sector-7 in Gurugram told www.thedelhicrown.com that the civil suit for permanent injunction filed by her in the year 2015 had got dismissed in default in the year 2017 for Non-Appearance due to a “fault” of her lawyer.

“My then lawyer had wrongly noted the date which had led to the dismissal of my civil suit,” she added.

Munita Yadav had filed a suit for permanent injunction against her father claiming her share in her ancestral properties.

Speaking to www.thedelhicrown.com, she said, “It has been seven years since my Application for Restoration of the civil suit has been pending before the court of Civil Judge Manoj Kumar Rana. Every time I visit the court, the judge gives another date. This silsila of Tareekh-pe-Tareekh has been going on for the past seven years. I fail to understand why the court is taking so long to dispose of my Application for Restoration.”

According to Munita Yadav, since her father had been the Nambardar and Sarpanch of village Sikanderpur Ghosi in Gurugram district, he has a “perfect nexus” with senior lawyers in Gurugram District Courts who know how to get long dates for him, “fix” the cases in his favour, and “buy” justice for him.

“My father has engaged the Dang advocates who are big names in Gurugram’s legal fraternity, and they have been buying justice for my father all these years,” said Munita in a huff.

“My father Ram Mehar Yadav owns ancestral properties worth hundreds of crores in village Sikanderpur Ghosi in Gurugram district and several pieces of lands in Sohna district. We are six sisters, having no brother. Our father Ram Mehar Yadav, who has been the Nambardar and Sarpanch of village Sikanderpur Ghosi, had abandoned our mother and all of us, after entering into a second wedlock with a girl of half his age in the year 1979. Our mother was alive then. He had never divorced her, thus his second marriage was illegal. The only objective of his second marriage was to have sons who would later become his legal heirs!” said Munita Yadav.

She further added, “Subsequently, our father had three sons from his second marriage. They were all born in the early 1980s. One of them died of Cancer at the age of 35 due to excessive smoking and drinking. The elder, who suffers from heart disease due to excessive smoking and drinking, was jailed in a rape case. And, the youngest among them has been behind the bars in a murder case.”

Narrating her story, Munita Yadav further stated – “Our youngest sister also lives in Gurugram. Her husband had suddenly gone missing around eight-nine years ago. She was in peril, since she had no means to support her two young daughters then. We approached our father to financially support our sister, but our father and his second wife flatly refused to do so. It was then we had decided to claim our respective shares in our ancestral properties. But this case has been lingering on for almost 10 years, and we have failed to get any relief so far.”