Thursday, May 08, 2008

Chari is Angry with the Supreme Court Judgement!

This was received from Alexis (France) author of the SRCM=DANGER blog and the French version of Projet Sahaj Marg:

The verdict of the Supreme Court of Justice

New chapter in the "WAR" between the SRCM ® (of Chari) and the SRCM of Shahjahanpur (Babuji's Family led by Navneet)

Chari is angry!

On 29 April, the eve of Babuji's anniversary, the Supreme Court of India made its judgement in the case between Chariji and SRCM ® and Navneet Kumar Saxena (grandson of Babuji and son of Umesh Chandra Saxena) of the SRCM of Shahjahanpur.

Navneet released the judgement on Tell me Truth India on May 3, and Chari has cancelled most of his travels in Europe at the same date. We are told that it was not for health reasons. Should we see a causal link between the judgement and the cancellation of Chari's trip?

Navneet said that the consequences of this decision are contained in the last lines of item 4:

Now, it only means elected by implication and that to be read
in the line of Section3(A) and 4 proviso, it is pointed out that
Section 25(2) refers to election and the remedy to challenge.
If there is no remedy nobody is left remedyless. Alternatively,
it is submitted that assuming it is to be done by nomination,
P. Rajgopalachari could have been nominated, but it has been
annulled on 16.4.1982 as Umesh Chandra Saxena remains
nominated. It is pointed out that role as President of the Sahaj
Marg system is different. The application filed by Sh. Rajgopalachari
has to be tested as per clause 3(b), these were not challenged and
Rajgopalchari cannot have nay role to play. P.Rajgopalachari
could not have been nominated because he is not in the direct
line of succession. In any event, after passing of order dated
16.4.1982 he has no role to play. The working committee's
decision, resolution of the General Body all are of similar
effect. The stand is strongly opposed by the respondent to say
that nomination were not merely in respect of the Sahaj Marg
system system but it was in respect of President itself.

Then Navneet added this comment: "At last Chari, Uma Shankar Bajpai and 6 others have been chargesheeted for the criminal offence of tresspassing into the Ashram on 2nd June 2006. Their non-bailable warrants are being issued for the same from the lower court Three days back. "

Is Chari going to appeal it? In all cases, he seems very unhappy about this turn of judicial events. After having agreed to attend the inauguration of the ashram of Milan, and his passage to Vrads (castle) then his return via Dubai, it is announced on May 7 that he will not go to Milan neither! For health reasons this time.

A big thank you to 4d-Don for his first-hand information.

You can find the full judgement of the Supreme Court below, as it is published on

4d-don's comments as brought up by Wormwood's comments: Notice items 5 and 6 of the JUDGEMENT attached.


Anonymous said...

Dear Navneet,
fine, that you are healthy and “in station” again. So, maybe, we can ask you some questions (or repeat some unanswered questions).
1. Y O U R D E C I S I O N IN ANSWER TO THE JUDGEMENT CONCERNING CIVIL APPEAL NO. 6619 OF 2000 (Supreme Court) should be given to the public. The Court decided that the decision of case of 2007 has to be done latest in 6 months. Will you take any legal activities of a so-called interim protection?
If you do, of what type will they be?

[The judgement of the Supreme Court for the case of the year 2000 says
“.....So far as ORIGINAL SUIT NO. 7359 OF 1989 is concerned, the findings recorded in the judgment therein could have constituted res judicata but the fact remains that the appellate court permitted the WITHDRAWAL OF THE SUIT and once the suit has been permitted to be WITHDRAWN all the proceedings taken therein including the judgment passed by the trial court have been wiped out. A judgment given in a suit which has been permitted to be withdrawn with the liberty of filing a fresh suit on the same cause of action CANNOT CONSTITUTE RES JUDICATE IN A SUBSEQUENT SUIT FILED PURSUANT to such permission of the court.
.... It would be appropriate to direct that THE PENDING SUIT [02/2007 HIGH COURT] shall be decided within a period of six months...
...It is open to the parties to move for such INTERIM PROTECTION ....”]

For example, for what did you need comments from other blogs? Why did you ask on for posting comments from there to your blog? (What is this policy of shifting comments from one blog to another blog? Are people asked if they agree with the shift? If not, is this honest? Didn’t you learn during study, not to make any quotations without giving the sourse of the quotation?
[From: on March 25, 2007 10:19:00 PDT PM/“Navneet said:”enter comments into new Blog Address as below I have lost comments from 124 onwards if people who have posted can re-post your welcome.”
On by Navneet at 10:03 PM 1 comments/ comment 1: 4d-Don said... “Hi Navneet........ “( now comments of many bloggers are encluded in this comment 1)]. Is there any SPIRITUAL reason in this?

3.Why are you looking for “supporters” and thinking about the “ (support) of a good n u m b e r of people”?
[From: a v n e e t /sandeep said.., an inactive abhayase of SRCMtm (not SRCM?)]

4. Do YOU know about A H I M S A or KNOW ALL PEOPLE AS YOUR BROTHERS AND TREAT THEM AS SUCH (Or less spiritual: prohibition on vigilantism)?
And what happened to a person who was beaten up in the past by your people, W H E R E I S H E N O W ?
[N a v n e e t K u m a r: “....After about 3 to 4 months Sh. Jahangirdhar also died on the spot at his residence soon after he was given pills in name of medicine by an individual.the individual was beaten in closed room and asked who was behind it he said I can't name him otherwise he will kill me, T O O . Now I am not saying who is behind it and what was the benefit he could have got...”
A B: “Mr. Navneet Kumar, I am able to imagine what happened in this “closed room”. Can you explain if this is the practical application of your spiritual theory in life?
N a v n e e t K u m a r: “I just narrated the incident which took place and by the person who was involved in questioning the gentleman who was the tool to Sh. Jahangirdar ji’s death. Moreover, just to bring to your notice that Sh. Jehangirdar ji did tell my father 3-4 months before his death that he knows that he will also die, like Babuji died and that was the reason that he gave the last letter of Babuji to my father during his visit to Shahjahanpur.”]

5. For what was BABUJI’S NEED TO TAKE CARE OF HIS TRANSMISSION when (like others, too, do) he believed that he will never die?
["I have descended on this earth as a living person. I will go back as a l i v i n g p e r s o n and the question of my dying does not arise." -- Babuji From: http://www. srcm s h a h j a h a n p u r
“As far as transmission is concerned, Babuji h a s t a k e n c a r e of the same b e f o r e l e a v i n g h i s p h y s i c a l B o d y . ”
From: N a v n e e t]

6. Do you wish to draw people’s attention to the fact, that the quotation "...I have never claimed to be a is unfortunate that some people..are addressing me by that term....So in fact, the purpose of my talk is to request all of you to stop addressing me as Master” originated in the time before 1988 (it was first published in 1988), which means about 20 years back?

7. Would you agree, if your grandfather Ram Chandra of Shajahanpur was the - ONLY - GURU OF SRCM, then SRCM wasn‘t created in honor of Ram Chandra of Fategarh and there will be no sucessor in future, too?
[N a v n e e t K u m a r: “I still abide by the everlasting fact that Babuji is the only and the last Guru of Shri Ram Chandra Mission.” ....“Let me clear that we are against the divisions and we still say that Babuji is the oonly GURU and shall remain till the end of this world.”
“The basic concept is that Babuji Maharaj is and shall continue to remain t h e o n l y G u r u till mahapralay ( doom's day ).” --- Lalaji Maharaj in a dream of Babuji
From: http://www.srcm s h a h j ah a n p u r“Successors & Spiritual Repräsentatives]

8. Do you know, that many (“very normal” people, not so- called special personalities) know the exact time when they will die, that others know that they will be killed? - My question is, HOW LIVED your grandfather his life knowing that there will be an attempt on his life and how did he deal with the question of death?
[A B: “Out of his explanations it seems to me stated, too, that Babuji (the special personality) seemed to be unable to find out W H O tried to make an attempt on his life.”
N a v n e e t K u m a r: Babuji did know that the attempt was being made on his life. His last letter clearly states so too. [The question again is: WHO?] He also predicted his long hospitalization, which also was true as we know that Babuji was in hospital from September soon after coming back from Paris to April 19th 1983 (The day of his Mahasamadhi. Moreover, as pointed by A old abhyasi about my Aunty stating B a b u j i ’s r e q u e s t o f F I R before leaving to Paris also clearly states that Babuji knew what the future had store for him.]

You allow me to tell the story of a well-known man in this context,
the story of the Sufi master Mansoor Hillaj.
It is said that Mansoor al Hillaj’s way to be killed was the worst ever done up to then. First his legs were cut off, then his hands were cut. He was alive. Then his tongue was cut, then his eyes were taken out. He was still alive. He was cut in pieces.
What crime had he done?
He had said, “An’al Haq.” (“I am the Truth. I am God.”)
The Seers of the Upanishads declare, “Aham Brahmasmi.” (“I am the Brahma, the Supreme Self.”)
The people couldn’t tolerante somebody saying this.
It is said when they cut Mansoor in peaces he looked to the sky and prayed to God and said, “You cannot deceive me! I can see you in everybody present here.
You are trying to deceive me? You have come as a the murderer?
I tell you in whatever form you come, I will recognize you, because I have recognized you in myself.”

And I’d like to direct your attention to the following text: “My Master had been seriously ill in the early part of the year 1974, and had to be finally hospitalised in Lucknow, where he lay in deep coma for almost one month. In view of his advanced age - he being 75 years old then - there were deep, though unexpressed, fears that the end may not be long. It was much of a miracle to most of us when he regained consciousness, and then went on to regain health.
It was my privilege to have been with him for part of the time he was hospitalised. I also went to Shahjahanpur after he was discharged from the hospital in Lucknow, and stayed with him for many days till he was relatively in better health, after his month of long ordeal. It was then that he revealed to me that he had chosen me to be his spiritual represantive, to eventually succeed him as the President of the Mission, whenever this became necessary. Those were, for me, very moving days, driving me to tears from moment to moment. Those were the blessed days when his gentle and deeply abiding love flowed upon me, over me, like a spring drizzle under blazing sunshine. Those were also the days of the most personal intimacy between us, when there seemed to be nothing at all between us, exept our two identities. It was as if he had removed all barriers between ourselves, and we were blissfully together in a oneness that would perhaps be difficult to experience later.
It was a time of the greatest happiness for me, and, rather surprisingly, the time of the greatest sorrow for me too, for it was then that I had to face the certain knowledge that one day my beloved would leave me to go into the brighter World. This knowledge almost broke my heart. He could of course divine it at a glance, and he would gently chide me for such thoughts, saying ‘I shall be with you for many more years. Do not worry about it now. Mrs . Davies told me that I shall live till 2006 or 2007,and others have told me the same thing. So don’t cry now. I shall be with you for a long time. One day we all shall have to go. But I repeat, it is very far off.’ Thus he would chide me and comfort me. But nevertheless, I could not bear to think of the time when he would not be with me, and thus began for me the hidden sorrow in my heart, which has never left me, and which, in 1983, became the stark and devastating reality that shall haunt me for the rest of my life. .....” P. Rajagopalachari, Bangalore, 8th March 1989

Nawneet Kumar, I see that you give second-hand informations to the auditory , which - generally - in most cases are unreliable, although there may be some truth in them. And I see, that we speek different languages (see 3.).
About the time of death of your grandfather you said
“My father had gone to America for his treatment, after attending the paris function. He came to know of Babuji’s illness and that he had been taken to hospital. So he cut short his visit returned back, and t h e n r e m a i n e d w i t h B a b u j i t i l l h e w a s i n t h e h o s p i t a l ....”
[First of all: Your father could afford to go for to U. S. for medical Treatment, this in the year 1983. I know Indians (professors, physicians, I don’t speak about poor people) who - in 2008 - say they can’t afford to go to a Western country. And I remember having read somewhere that the father of the same person, Babuji, told, that he couldn’t afford to drink milk, this in the days when the first visitors came to his home. (Somewhere I read that his trips to the West were paid by Western (Danish?) abhyasis.) I am surprised about what you tell here about about a medical treatment of your father. (But this isn’t the most important aspect of the discussion here.] The question is: WHERE was your father when Babuji DIED? WHO was with Babuji when he DIED? - You never answered these questions.

I have nobody to ask for permission to write on this or any other blog. I can’t agree with the intentions behind SOME BLOGS and some comments. Moreover I don’t believe that the so-called discussions there serve the subject. For you, Navneet, I may say: You may think you serve the interests of your grandfather. It is my strong belief, that you don’t do.
Please, answer our questions before you go out of station again!

Anonymous said...

Hi anonymous...

Thanks for the "comments".

I put your comments in an "article" so all can read it readily...and offer you some comments if they want to...

PS... I do not know Navneet, and have never met him!


Shashwat said...

I really wonder what these zombie's want to know, they do not have this much of common sense, that they should ask a person question at the place where he is available.

"The open letter to Navneet" on Don's blog is outcome of frustration. If s/he really wants any answer and does not wish advertisement, s/he should have asked it at this place.


Anonymous said...

Hi shashwat...

Religions use "persecution" as their reason for "attacking". So they always try and create a situation where someone does not agree with them and hence "persecutes" them and then they yell "religious descrimination".

It is called the "soft totalitarianism" or "let me have my way" or I'll say your are "intolerant" as opposed to the militarist jack-boots of fascism or other totalitarian-isms. And my way, they claim, is to control everything or to have everyone in MY GROUP, and "UNDER ME" or my GOD or my GURU or my MASTER...

Some, who are ATHEISTS, call that the "Tyranny of the ONE" or the MONO-theists, those who believe in ONE God only, THEIRS, and hence if you don't believe in their GOD, you are the "ENEMY" or as Chari and the SRCM would say: your are CORRUPT and the attack you in their "speeches", litterature, but always in a way that can be defended. They are not very good at it and we were able to find many "flaws" in their theology, philosophy, morals, ethics, etc...thanks to the INTERNET...

They, SRCM (Chennai), think we are favouring Navneet's SRCM (Shahjahanpur), or are in his Camp, but I am here to EXPOSE ALL FAITH-Based FANTASY MERCHANTS who preach "OBEY" as oppose to promote a system such such as RAJA YOGA which I don't even address because they SRCM then claim to be a system that start at #7 of an 8 part system... I think that is funny...but let the people decide for themselves if they believe that or not.

It's a question of Freedom of Belief or RELIGION and I respect that...I just expose the "CONFIDENCE" (con) games of the Pyramidal systems that have a MAN at the TOP and the rest of us as SERFS or SLAVES at the bottom of a "hierarchy" of the "enlightened"..

I don't care if it's the "special personality" or the Messiah, of the Son of God, ITSELF... I ONLY WANT THE ONE that is ALL....


Woodworm said...


I am very confused by the reactions and extreme positions in your blog to the latest Court judgment. Definitely, there is a lot of legalese there - but if you carefully read the verdict multiple times, you can see the various instances of the phrases "it is pointed out", "the stand is that" etc.

In other words, Point 4 merely explains the contention of the appellants and the position of the respondent. The judgment is in the subsequent points.

Again if you carefully read you may notice that the court has viewed it unnecessary to make a special interpretation of an amgiguous clause of the incorporation law, as appealed to by Navneet and others. It has re-directed focus to a pending petition ("main case" if we may call it so), and has said that all questions need to be answered there within six months.

I am beginning to suspect your blog is giving voice to people who misrepresent facts. I must quickly also say - I havent seen you responding either way on this issue. So thats not a personal accusation.

It is entirely your judgement call on what opinion you want to consider and publish. But remember your credibility too is at stake.

Anonymous said...

Hi Wormwood...

I am not a lawyer so my "un-prefessional" opinion does not matter, I simply made the Court JUDGEMENT available to all, for all to make their own mind up on this matter. I noticed the sections 5 and 6 you mention also but I don't have a record of the original case, or I would have added it also...

As it was "confusing", I asked Navneet, (one of the parties involved in the case) to give us his lawyer's opinion of the judgement and this article is what he replied. SRCM (Chennai) or Chari and his Group are not "forthcoming" with information.

By the way, the article previous (or after) to this one is an article gleaned from a post by someone (anonymous) not so "pro" Navneet and seems to be "PRO Chari"... as an OPEN LETTER, so your accusation is not credible but I will attempt to be fair if some other information or a point of view is presented...

So, if you want to present something with more information or an "authoritative point of view", as an article, I will POST it as a service to my readers.

Your present comments have been published in the comments, (as mine) but does not warrant an article as you don't seem to have any more information than what is already in the attached "judgement", or (apparently) any more "authority" than I do, and I did not add my OPINION in the article...So I won't add your comments either, unless you present it as an article with some additional information (say...from the original court case...with verifiable links)

Most researchers will read the comments and your info may be read there by my site's 60+ hits per day...


Your point about the 6 months has been noticed by me but not "interpreted" and I appreciate your comments.