Supreme Court Of Indian Delhi

Mukesh Sharma

H.No. 470 Krishna Enclave Village Suridhy Bitna Tehsil Kalka District Panchkula State Haryana, Pin
code 134102, Mail ID – m.sharma7771@gmail.com, Contact No. 9872227771

Vs

Richa Rani, Shakuntla Devi, Advocate N.S Toor,

H.No. 66 Gali no. 5 Adarsh Nagar Sirhind Mandi District Fathegarh Sahib State Punjab, Pin Code
140406, Contact No. 9915412133, 7973187638,

Address of Advocate N.S Toor, Cabin No. 265 Fathegarh Sahib Session and District Court Chamber.

Vs

Previous Magistrate Mr. Ashish Bansal, Magistrate Mr. Jagbir Singh Mehendiratta, Magistrate Ms.
Dipti Goyal , Magistrate Ms. Pamel preet Kaur, Session Court Judge Dr. Harpreet Kaur and Previous
Family Court Judge Mr. Bikramjit Singh, District Judge Mr. Arun Gupta Sir, ( Session and District Court
Fathegarh Sahib Punjab )

Revision Appeal under the limitation Act and order challenge under the Article 14 For Right Justice,

Subject :- Below Mentioned Evidence and statement Submitted to Session Court Judge Mr. Arun
Gupta Sir and Magistrate Mr. Jagbir Singh under Section 340 CRPC, Child Custody, Against Execution
Appeal of Dv Act, Section 182, 187, 191, 192, 193, 195, 197, 211 IPC, 120B, 420, 499, 500, Article 14,
15, 19 and 21, 219 IPC, 167 IPC,

Below mentioned evidence and statement under order 7 rule 10, order 7 rule 11, order 12 rule 6,

1. Omansh Sharma class attendance sheet of Dav Public School Pakhowal Road Ludhiana, Class
UKG, Section G, Roll No. 29, Last date visited in school on 11 March 2019, Feb 2019 and
March 2019 submitted to session court judge Mr. Arun Gupta Sir, which evidence proof
under section 182, 191,192,193,195, 340 crpc, 120B, 420, also submitted on mail to All high
Official, this evidence showing that Richa Rani not left the home on Feb 2019, she was
mentioning in Dv Act, 125 CRPC, shakuntla devi also mentioning in own witness statement,
Magistrate Mr. Ashish Bansal Also Approved the maintenance from Feb 2019, this evidence
also proof that my son Omansh Sharma not doing the study in Jessus saviour public School
of Sirhind from Feb 2019,

2. Invitation of Hawan letter of Dav Public school Pakhowal Road Ludhiana for my Daughter
class Teacher Ms. Geetanjali Chadha for class Prekg section F, this evidence proof that my
 daughter session was starting from 1 April 2019, My daughter Taarishi Sharma was not going
to any school in Feb and March 2019, she was doing the study in crèche in near by my house
in Ludhiana, this evidence showing that my daughter was not doing the study in jessus
saviour public school of sirhind in Feb and March 2019, But magistrate Mr. Ashish Bansal
Approved the maintenance of my daughter from Feb 2019, evidence already submitted to
session Court Judge Mr. Arun Gupta Sir and high official judiciary on mail,

3. As per law if Daughter above 5 years and son above 8 years, than father have right of
children custody, that’s why I had already submitted the birth certificate of both children to
session court judge Mr. Arun Gupta Sir, also submitted the same to Family court Judge Mr.
Bikramjit Singh during the GW act case, also submitted to all high official judiciary on mail, as
per law HMA act, GW Act and Dv section 21 father have first right of the children, father is
first natural guardian, Magistrate Mr. Jagbir Singh Mehendiratta was mentioning in order of
Richa Rani vs Mohan Murari Sharma case that Taarishi Sharma age 5 years and Omansh
sharma age 8 years, this evidence showing that magistrate was giving wrong statement, this
evidence under section 340 CRPC,

4. Taarishi Sharma D/O/B 11 July 2016 and birth certificate number is 1078066, already
submitted to session court judge Mr. Arun Gupta Sir, also submitted to all high official on
mail, also submitted to family court judge Mr. Bikramjit Singh during the time of GW act
case, this evidence under section 340 CRPC,

5. Omansh Sharma D/O/B 1 Aug 2013 and birth certificate number is 244722, already
submitted to session court judge Mr. Arun Gupta Sir, also submitted to all high official on
mail, also submitted to family court judge Mr. Bikramjit Singh during the time of GW act
case, this evidence under section 340 crpc,

6. Micromax salary slip of July 2020 and bank statement of standard chartered bank of Aug
2020 statement with amount of 42770 rs, also submitted to session court judge Mr. Arun
Gupta Sir and also submitted to high official on mail, Richa Rani was mentioning 82000 rs
salary in Dv act case, 125 CRPC case, divorce case, shakuntla devi also mentioning the same
statement in own witness Affidavit on 17 Nov 2021, magistrate Mr. Ashish Bansal also
mentioned the same In own judgment on 12 Jan 2022, also submitted the same evidence to
Magistrate Mr. Jagbir Singh Mehendiratta on 24 July 2024, both evidence under section 340
crpc,

7. Micromax reliving proof on 24 Aug 2020 also submitted to session court judge Mr. Arun
Gupta Sir, also submitted the same to magistrate Mr. Jagbir Singh Mehendiratta on 24 July
2024, also submitted the same to all high official on mail, magistrate Mr. Ashish Bansal was
also mentioning in own judgment on 12 Jan 2022 that Mukesh sharma is doing job in
micromax mobile, which was wrong, because when magistrate Mr. Ashish Bansal was giving
the judgement about my job, that time I was jobless, this evidence under section 340 crpc,

8. Bankrupt evidence of SBI, RBL and Icici proof already submitted to session court judge Mr.
Arun Gupta Sir, also submitted to all high official on mail, this proof under section 340 crpc,
because when magistrate Mr. Ashish Bansal was giving the judgment about my financial
condition, that time I was bankrupt,
9. Current salary slip with amount of 63253 rs also submitted to session court judge Mr. Arun
Gupta Sir, this evidence under section 340 crpc,

10. Richa Rani( Dv act, 125 CRPC, Divorce ), shakuntla devi ( witness in DV act ), Advocate N.S
Toor and magistrate Mr. Ashish Bansal ( in own judgment ) mentioning that Mukesh Sharma
is doing property dealer work, he have extra income with amount of 20000 rs, which was
wrong, because I have no knowledge of property dealer work, I had not purchased and sold
of any property, I had not provided the any property on rent to anybody, they are giving
wrong statement. Evidence still not received about it, this statement under section 340 crpc,

11. Own full medical check up report and govt Doctor prescribe medicine report submitted to
session court judge Mr. Arun Gupta Sir and also submitted the same to all high official on
mail, this evidence proof that I have no in-toxic problem, vitamin D and high sugar has been
deducted by Doctor, this evidence under section 340 crpc,

12. According 118 of witness act shakuntla Devi was not eligible for witness, after that advocate
Mr. N.S Toor was making the witness to her, Magistrate Mr. Ashish Bansal also considering
the statement of her, as per my above evidence shakuntkla devi was giving wrong
statement, she was submitting wrong affidavit, shakuntla devi statement also submitted to
session court judge Mr. Arun Gupta Sir and also submitted to all high official on mail, under
section 340 crpc,

13. 125 CRPC statement of Richa Rani also submitted to session court judge Mr. Arun Gupta Sir
and also submitted to all high official on mail, when Richa Rani filing the case, that time she
was mentioning own age 33, when I had received the statement on 15 oct 2022, that time
she was mentioning the age 40 years, Richa Rani aadhar card already submitted in family
court to Bikramjit Singh and also submitted to all high official on mail, this evidence under
section 340 CRPC,

14. As per Dv act statement, As per judgment of Mr. Ashish Bansal Richa Rani demanding the
maintenance from Feb 2019, when she was filing the statement of 125 CRPC, that time she
was demanding the maintenance from feb 2019, but while I had received the statement
from family court on 15 oct 2022, that time she was demanding the maintenance from 8
sept 2019, Magistrate Mr. Ashish Bansal was approving the maintenance from Feb 2019,
Advocate N.S Toor demanding the maintenance from 8 June 2019, Advocate N.S Toor giving
the statement on 21 Oct 2022 in family court in front of Bikramjit Singh, advocate also saying
that statement also attached, but when I had checked the case file on 8 Dec 2022, that time
this type of statement not attached in case file, 125 CRPC statement submitted to session
court judge Mr. Arun Gupta Sir and also submitted to high official on mail, this evidence
under section 340 CRPC,

15. Section 9 and Gw act statement submitted to session court judge Mr. Arun Gupta Sir and
high official on mail, Advocate N.S Toor was saying in this statement that Magistrate Mr.
Ashish Bansal Approved the maintenance in 125 CRPC, because I was not visiting in 125
CRPC, Firstly 125 CRPC case already running in family court, secondly 29 April 2021 was case
herring date of 125 CRPC to the magistrate court of Mr. Ashish Bansal, But he had
transferred the case on 27 April 2021, means 2 days before of case date, magistrate was
transferring the case in family court, I had visited to magistrate court on 29 April 2021, CC tv
 camera already pasted in front of building gate and camera also pasted in front of
magistrate Mr. Ashish Bansal Court, after transferring the case 27 April 2021 to till 14 oct
2022, I had not received the any summon from the side of family court, can you explain me
that family court judge was sleeping, if he was sending the summon to me, where is the
summon copies and address, advocate N.S Toor was giving wrong statement, as per
advocate statement on 23 Aug 2024 in front of magistrate Mr. Jagbir Singh mehendiratta
that Mukesh Sharma had done the cross examine of statement, As per statement of
Advocate N.S Toor, when magistrate Mr. Ashish Bansal was approving the maintenance in
125 CRPC, when he was saying that I had not visiting in the court during the time of 125 crpc
case, then how can I done the cross examine of 125 crpc statement, while Richa Rani
demanding the maintenance from 8 sept 2019, then why magistrate Mr. Ashish Bansal
Approved the maintenance from Feb 2019, as per advocate N.S Toor statement, if
magistrate Mr. Ashish Bansal Approved the maintenance in 125 crpc, then why 125 crpc
case still running, moral of the story is that advocate was giving wrong statement, this
statement under section 340 crpc,
16. Divorce case statement submitted to session court judge Mr. Arun Gupta Sir and all high
official on mail, I had received different statement from the court statement om 15 oct 2022,
as per received statement Richa Rani left the home in Feb 2019, but when I had checked the
divorce case file on 8 Dec 2022, she was mentioning that she was not able to left the home
in Feb 2019, this statement under section 182, 187, 195, 340 crpc, 120, 420,
17. I had submitted 452 and 506 case statement ( Richa Rani vs Brij Bhushan Sharma ) to session
court judge Mr. Arun Gupta Sir and also submitted to high official on mail, case already
dismissed by Magistrate Mr. jagbir Singh Mehendiratta on 19 Dec 2024, Richa Rani file
wrong case on me and my family for pressure create about the money, which was wrong,
due to wrong case and wrong affidavit, this evidence under section 340 crpc and 211 ipc,
18. I had submitted Dv act statement ( Richa Rani vs Mohan Murari Sharma ) submitted to
session court judge Mr. Arun Gupta Sir and high official on mail, when my family members
are not living with me, after that Richa Rani filing the wrong Dv act case on my family
members for pressure create about the money, case dismissed by Magistrate Mr. Jagbir
Singh mehendiratta on 19 Dec 2024, due to wrong case filed by Richa Rani and wrong
statement and wrong affidavit, this evidence under section 340 crpc and 182, 195,
19. I had already submitted the on bank statement 1 April 2019 to till 22 May 2020 to magistrate
Mr. Jagbir Singh Mehendiratta on 24 July 2024. After left the home by Richa Rani, I had
transferred the money to Richa Rani without demand, after that she was saying that I was
not giving the maintenance to her, As per law and supreme court and high court guidelines
separated women only eligible for one year maintenance, which I had already paid to her
without demand, But as per latest order of magistrate Mr. Jagbir Singh, I was not giving
maintenance to her, Richa Rani filed the affidavit in court, magistrate Mr. Jagbir Singh was
giving arrest warrant and property sale order, which was wrong, firstly still I had not received
single evidence about the judgment of Mr. Ashish Bansal, I had already submitted lot of
evidence to session court judge Mr. Arun Gupta Sir, magistrate Mr. jagbir Singh
Mehendiratta and high official on mail, after that magistrate was giving wrong order, while
he know about that magistrate Mr. Ashish Bansal judgment was wrong, After that
magistrate Mr. Jagbir Singh Mehendiratta was not ready to take the action against to Richa
Rani, shakuntla devi and advocate N.S Toor, this evidence under section 340 CRPC,
20. I had submitted Richa Rani job proof to magistrate Mr. Jagbir Singh Mehendiratta on 24 July
2024, After that magistrate was not ready for take the action against Richa Rani, shakuntkla
devi and Adviocate N.S Toor, This evidence under section 340 crpc,
21. Richa Rani, Shakuntla Devi and advocate N.S Toor and magistrate Mr. Ashish Bansal saying
that Richa Rani have no income source, But During the time of GW Act case herring on 21
Jan 2023, Richa Rani saying that she is doing private job in Gobindgarh in front of family
court judge Mr. Bikramjit Singh, During the compromise in court room no. 8, in front of
Harpreet Kaur, Richa Rani Saying that she is doing private job, Richa Rani also accepted the
same in front of previous District judge Mr. Nirbhow Singh Gill Sir and Family court judge Mr.
Bikramjit Singh on 27 Feb 2023, during the time of Dv act section 21 Richa rani saying that
she is doing private job, she is accepting the same on 11 July 2024 in front of Magistrate
Mr.Jagbir Singh Mehendiratta, After that magistrate Mr. jagbir Singh was not ready to take
the action against to Richa Rani under section 340 crpc,
22. Richa Rani mentioning in Dv act statement ( Richa Rani vs Mukesh Sharma ) and 125 CRPC,
GW act and section 9 about the 5 lacs cash and dowry ornament, shakuntla Devi ( witness
statement ) also mentioned the same, Magistrate Mr. Ashish Bansal Also mentioning that I
had accepted, which was wrong, still I have not received the evidence about it, As per
Divorce case statement Richa Rani mentioning 1 lac acsh and gold ornament, But still I have
not received the evidence, As per Dv act case statement ( Richa Rani vs Mohan Murari
Sharma ) of Richa Rani mentioning 1 lacs ornament, Magistrate Jagbir Singh Mehendiratta
also saying in own judgment on 19 Dec 2024 that respondent accepted the same, which was
wrong, evidence still not received, case already dismissed by magistrate Mr. Jagbir Singh
mehendirattaon 19 Dec 2024, As per magistrate Mr. jagbir Singh Mehendiratta order of 19
Dec 2024, Richa Rani also declined the stand from the case on 26 Nov 2024, As per
statement ( Richa Rani vs Brij Bhushan Sharma ) in 452 and 506 of Richa Rani, 1 lacs gold
theft by me and my family members on 26 Jan 2021, evidence still not received, case already
dismissed by magistrate Mr. Jagbir Singh Mehendiratta on 19 Dec 2024, Magistrate Mr.
Jagbir Singh was not ready to take the action against to Richa Rani and Shakuntkla Devi
under Dowry prob act and section 340 crpc, because they are saying that me and my family
members were demanding dowry, which was wrong, evidence still not received,
23. As per Richa Rani Statement of Dv act and 125 CRPC ( Richa Rani vs Mukesh Sharma ),
Shakuntla Devi ( witness ) statement in Dv act ( Richa Rani vs Mukesh Sharma ), Richa Rani
have no income source, As per judgment of Mr. Ashish Bansal ( in Dv act Richa Rani vs
Mukesh Sharma ) they have no income source, then why magistrate was not approving the
permanent child custody, as per law father is first natural guardian, he have first right on the
children, as per GW act and DV act section 21, if any person have no income source, then
they have no right of child custody, according to Gw act section 6 and Dv act section 21
father have right of temp custody and permanent custody, as per law if Daughter above 5
years and son above 8 years, then father have right to child custody, I had also submitted the
Birth certificate of both children to session court judge Mr. Arun Gupta Sir for Dv act section
21, Family court judge Mr, Bikramjit Singh in GW act section 6, also submitted to High official
on mail, But still I have not received the child custody, I was no able to meeting with my
children from last 5 years, can explain me that in which law mentioned that father have no
right to meet with own children, Maintenance and property required from the father, but
father can not be meet with own children, where is mention, this statement and evidence
under section 340 CRPC,
24. According to section 28 and 32 Dv act 2005 and 2006, rule 15 and limitation act, 468 and
473, Dv act was not applicable on me and my family members, when I was not living with
Richa Rani from last 1.5 years, then how to applicable the Dv act on me. Why case has been
registered on me, where is the IO report which is mention that domestic violence, when
 domestic violence has been prove, why they had registered the case without any evidence,
why they had sent the summon without strong evidence,
25. When she left the home own by own, then how can you approved the maintenance, then
how can she eligible for maintenance,
26. When she well educated and doing private job, then how can you approved the
maintenance, when she hiding about own job and mentioning wrong statement, then how
can you approved the maintenance,
27. When Richa Rani filing wromg affidavit, giving wrong statement, submitting wrong witness
statement, filing wrong case on my family members, when she was giving wrong police
complaint against to me and my family members, then how can you approved the
maintenance,
28. Article 14, 15, 19,21, 182, 187, 191,192,193,195,197, 211 iPC, 167 IPC, 219 IPC, 340 CRPC,
120 B, 420, 499, 500 and dowry prob act, Supreme court guidelines, high court guidelines,
Advocate law, Constitution of India break by fathegarh judiciary officers,
29. What is the meaning of Domestic Violence,
30. What is the responsibility of Judiciary officers,
31. Why constitution of India introduce by Indian Govt,
32. Why you peoples are registering the case without evidence,
33. Why you peoples are sending the summon without evidence and investigation,
34. As per law protection order for only protection not for maintenance, if any judiciary officers
approving the maintenance, then he will mentioned the section 21 and 19 in protection
order, if section 21 and 19 not mentioned, then no value of maintenance order, if any
judiciary officer will approve the monetary relief, then he will provide the evidence,
monetary relief and maintenance both can not be applicable, after provide the evidence of
monetary relief, amount can be convert to maintenance, without provide the evidence
maintenance and monetary relief can not be active, because protection order 18 only for
protection, as per latest judgment of supreme court threat does not mean that it’s a
compensation amount, so as per law no value of maintenance in protection order,
35. All statement, orders and evidence seen by Session court judge Mr. Arun Gupta Sir to you, if
you think about it that honest person have required right justice, then provide to me,
otherwise please guide and inform to me about the further future of Article 14, Why Article
14 introduce in constitution of india, Because As per law if 340 CRPC already running the 125
CRPC can not run and maintenance can not approved, 2 maintenance case can not be run as
per law, But 125 CRPC running and magistrate Mr. Ashish Bansal already given wrong order,
Magistrate Mr. Jagbir Singh already given the order for property sale without provide the
evidence against the wrong judgment of Mr. Ashish Bansal, while magistrate Mr. Ashish
Bansal given the second order of vide on 14 Feb 2022, when I had given the complaint to
high official, Magistrate Mr. Jagbir Singh mehendiratta was mentioning the child custody
section 21 of dv act that law have no provision of temp custody on 11 July 2024 and 24 July
2024, when I had informed to high official about it, after that magistrate Mr. Jagbir Singh
Mehendireatta was giving order in back date and mentioning the temp custody not granted.
Family court judge Mr. Bikramjit Singh has ben destroyed the summon copies of 125 Crpc
and Divorce case, which I had signed on 15 oct 2022 in court room, while I had checked the
case file of both cases, then I found that my signed summon copies not attached in the case
file. Magistrate Mr. Jagbir Singh Mehendiratta and Pamelpreet Kaur was giving munadi
summon order in my family case of Dv act ( Richa Rani vs Monhan Murari Sharma ), without
IO report and without evidence both are giving the munadi summon order, as per supreme
court and high court guidelines, nobody can send the summon to anybody without strong
evidence, they all are breaking the law, Dr. Harpreet Kaur ( session court judge ) already
seen the judgment of Mr. Ashish Bansal, I had already discussed the evidence with her, after
that she was not ready to take the action against to actual culprit, she was not ready to
submitted the evidence, same think with Magistrate Mr. Jagbir Singh Mehendiratta and Mr.
Ashish Bansal. Session and district court Judge Mr. Arun Gupta was saying to me that I will
approved your divorce without alimony, I was saying to him that I need the compensation
against the harassment and mental torcher, I was demanding the child custody for
compensation, he have no answer about it, while I am eligible for more compensation, I was
meet with my family to magistrate Ms. Dipti Goyal on 10 May 2022, that time I was saying
to her that how can you registered the case against to my family, when my family members
were not living with me. That time Magistrate Ms. Dipti Goyal Saying that I can not be stop
to her for wrong case, while they was running the case without any strong evidence, they
were mental torcher and harass to me and my family on wrong affidavit. Which was very
pathetic, So please provide the compensation to me and family, we are demanding child
custody in compensation,

Constitution of India destroy by the Fathegarh Judiciary Officers ( Main Culprit Mr. Ashish
Bansal, Mr. Bikramjit Singh and Mr. Jagbir Singh Mehendiratta ), Who will take the action
against to actual culprit, Who is honest Judiciary Officer, Where is honest judiciary officers,

Regards
Mukesh Sharma
9872227771
m.sharma7771@gmail.com