Failed Legal Maneuvers Against Sathya Sai Baba: PART THREE

Failed Legal Maneuvers Against Sathya Sai Baba: PART THREE

Barry Pittard’s Bold-Faced Lies About Justice P.N. Bhagwati:

On Barry Pittard’s defamatory Anti-Sai WordPress blog, he said the following about Justice P.N. Bhagwati and Hari Sampath’s writ petition:

“One of India’s top advocates, Kamini Jaiswal, took the case on behalf of Hari Sampath, a noted dissenter from Sai Baba, formerly from the Security wing at Puttaparthi, and she and her assisting Counsel Prashant Kumar and Gaurav Agarwal and their client had to suffer the ignominy of a kangaroo court presided over by the profoundly compromised judges: S.P. Barucha, A.S. Anand, G.B. Patnaik (or G.B. Pattnaik), and R.C. Lahoti. Each one of these went on to become Chief Justice of India. Their CJ at the time was P.N. Bhagwati, a very active member of the Sathya Sai Central Trust, well known for keeping a damper on Sai Baba scandals over many years. As a number of us know personally, when the legal notes for this case are shown in legal quarters, including eminent ones, where mature democratic principles much more cohere, the lawyers are disgusted!”

Although it is true that Justice P.N. Bhagwati is a Sai Devotee, he never presided over (or exerted influence over) any court case pertaining to Sai Baba because no actual court cases ever involved the Guru. Furthermore, Justice Prafullachandra Natwarlal Bhagwati was a Chief Justice from July 1985 – December 1986.

Barry Pittard is adept in distorting the truth and is wholly incapable of conducting even the most remedial of research. For those who care for the truth, Justice P.N. Bhagwati retired from his Chief Justice position on December 20th 1986 (Ref), fifteen years before Hari Sampath filed his bogus writ petition. Therefore, Justice P.N. Bhagwati was not the Chief Justice at the time of Hari Sampath’s writ petition (as erroneously claimed by Pittard). Because Barry Pittard was under the false notion that Justice P.N. Bhagwati was the presiding Chief Justice at that time, he trashed, bashed and smeared all of the Justices as being “profoundly compromised” and insinuated that they were favorably inclined towards Sai Baba. These are the typical gutter tactics that Barry Pittard can often be seen employing against his former Guru (after whom he named his own son, which he fathered with a 21 year-old when he was 58 years old and old enough to be her grand-father: Ref).

If Barry Pittard cannot get these basic facts correct about Justice P.N. Bhagwati (before peddling his disinformation as the truth on his Anti-Sai blog), what does this say about the integrity of his claims about Sai Baba?

Justice PN Bhagwati

PN Bhagwati

”Justice P.N. Bhagwati is one of the most distinguished jurists of India since the independence of that country. He presided over the Supreme Court of India as its Chief Justice until his retirement. Under his leadership the Indian Supreme Court has developed comprehensive human rights jurisprudence for India . He, through creative interpretation, expanded the reach and context of human rights embodied in the Constitution. He developed the strategy of Public Interest Litigation with a view to making human rights meaningful for the large masses of poor and disadvantaged people. This is a strategy, which has won admiration in many common law jurisdictions.

He is closely connected with a large number of NGOs, both in India and outside, and has been motivating and inspiring grassroots human rights and development NGOs. Justice Bhagwati is the Chairman of the South Asian Task Force on Judiciary. He is Vice-Chairman of El Taller, an International Human Rights Development Organization located in Tunis . He has organized a number of judicial colloquia in different parts of the Commonwealth on “Domestic Application of International Human Rights norms” for judges in the Commonwealth. He has also promoted and participated in numerous workshops of lawyers and judges on the subject of human rights organized by NGOs and was Chairman of the World Congress on Human Rights held in New Delhi in December 1990.

He has been a member of the Committee of Experts of the ILO for over 15 years. For over 6 years he was the Vice-Chairman of the United Nations Human Rights Committee, and he is now elected as the Chairman. The United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights has taken him as Regional Adviser for the Asia Pacific Region. He has also carried out several missions for the United Nations Centre for Human Rights, the Commonwealth Secretariat, and the International Commission of Jurists. His services have been utilized by several countries, including Mongolia , Cambodia , Nepal , Ethiopia , and South Africa in framing their Constitutions and particularly the chapters on human rights. He was a member of the Goldstone Commission of inquiry in South Africa . He was also involved in finalizing the draft manual for training of judges in human rights prepared by the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights.

Justice Bhagwati has been particularly active in the area of women’s human rights. He has been the moderator and the main resource person for at least three judicial workshops of women judges for domestic application of international human rights norms in the jurisprudence of women’s human rights, one in Victoria Falls for African judges, the other in Hong Kong for Asia Pacific judges and the third in Guyana for Caribbean judges. He presided over the Peoples Tribunal for Violence against Women at the Vienna Human Rights congress. This Tribunal was organized by International Women NGOs.

He has been responsible for a considerable amount of work in the field of human rights and development among tribals and particularly tribal women in South and East India and has provided leadership to the NGO, AWARE, in making 6,000 villages self-reliant. Two large complexes in rural areas have been named after him. He is a household name amongst the poor and underprivileged sectors of Indian society.

Justice P.N. Bhagwati was responsible for making a large number of innovations with a view to providing access to justice to the poor and disadvantaged. He enlarged the doctrine of locus standi before the Supreme Court and the High Courts for vindicating the individual and collective rights of those who were denied access to justice on account of poverty or social or economic disability.

He at the same time worked successfully to build up an elaborate legal aid programme. He is widely regarded as the originator of India ‘s legal aid programme, including setting up of legal aid camps in rural areas, working with NGOs, establishing legal aid clinics etc.

Numerous documentaries have been made on him and his work including one where he is one of six outstanding Indians on whose life the Indian TV has done a profile. He has been the most visible member of India ‘s Judiciary since independence. His reputation and his impact, through his judicial and legal aid work, is so enormous that the public response has been quite phenomenal, e.g., a village where the tribal people benefited from his judgement, renamed the village after him calling it BHAGWATI PURAM.

He has championed the cause of workers and labourers. His thought provoking judgements on bonded and unorganized labour and child labour have resulted in various legislations and government schemes in improving their social and economic conditions. He is also involved in the programme of sustainable development and has been responsible for developing poverty jurisprudence in India.

His services have been availed of by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. He is the Chairman of Eminent Persons Group for Study of questions relating to refugees. He is also Chairman of the Advisory Board of the Centre for Independence of Judges and Lawyers (CIJL) based in Geneva and as such he is associated with many of the activities of the International Commission of Jurists, Geneva.

He has also been a member of the Permanent Court of Arbitration at The Hague for the last several years. He was also a member of the International Mediation Team with Henry Kissinger and Lord Carrington for mediation between Inkatha and ANC before the elections in South Africa.

He is presently Chairman of the Human Rights Committee under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights of the United Nations. He is also the Regional Adviser to the High Commissioner for Human Rights for the entire Asia and Pacific Region. He is also a Member of the International Advisory Council of the World Bank for Legal and Judicial Reforms. He is also the Honorary Fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences.

He is Chancellor of the Hyderabad University.

He is also Chancellor of Shr Lal Bahadur Shastri Rashtriya Sanskrit Vidyapeeth.

He is also the Honorary Member of the Association of the Bar of the City of New York.” (Reference)

This is the type of esteemed and well-respected individual that critic’s casually defame, mock and trivialize to bolster their lamentable case against Bhagavan Sri Sathya Sai Baba.


Also see:

Failed Legal Maneuvers: Part One
Failed Legal Maneuvers: Part Two
Failed Legal Maneuvers: Part Three (You Are Here)
Failed Legal Maneuvers: Part Four
Failed Legal Maneuvers: Part Five
Failed Legal Maneuvers: Part Six
Failed Legal Maneuvers: Part Seven

Failed Legal Maneuvers Against Sathya Sai Baba: PART ONE

Failed Legal Maneuvers Against Sathya Sai Baba: PART ONE

Hari Sampath’s Failed Supreme Court Writ Petition Against Sathya Sai Baba’s Original Statement:
On this website, I (Joe Moreno) made the following statement of fact, which no Anti-Sai Activist can refute with verifiable information or documentation:

“Sathya Sai Baba has never had even one single complaint lodged against him by any alleged victim, first-hand, in India. As a matter of fact, not even one alleged victim has even tried to file a basic police complaint or court case against Sathya Sai Baba in India (the only place where courts would have jurisdiction over Baba as an individual defendant).”

Barry Pittard claimed on his defamatory Anti-Sai WordPress blog (without specifically naming me) that my original statement is incorrect. It is apparent that Barry Pittard obviously has difficulty understanding my original statement and confused court case attempts with actual court cases. Although questionable court cases have been attempted against Sathya Sai Baba, he never had to obtain a lawyer to defend himself because the court cases never made it to trail because they were rejected by Judges who saw through their obvious fraudulence. To Date: Sathya Sai Baba has never (ever) been formally charged with any crime (sexual or otherwise) in a court of law in India. This is an indisputable statement of fact and I suggest Barry Pittard stop confusing himself and others by failing to differentiate between attempts to file a court case with an actual court case with lawyers representing a plaintiff and defendant. Furthermore, Barry Pittard’s citations of court case attempts were never filed (first-hand) in India by alleged victims.

Continue reading