Perversion of Justice
Watcher
FAO Rt Hon the Lord Phillips of Worth Matravers
Master of the Rolls
House of Lords
London SW1A 0PW
Complaint of Ashok Mahajan of 20 Ammanford Green London NW9 7SA against:
Perverters of justice evil criminals in the Civil Appeal Court
1. Tuckey/Parker LJJ
A. These two perverters of justice criminals on 25 July 2000
purported to hear my appeal from the decision of a corrupt Judge Ryland
of the Central London County Court in the matter of Mahajan v Vivianne
Bella Waldman and Mahajan v Sibell Associates Ltd which was listed under
the Court of Appeal reference B2/1999/8159 and served fellow judges than
justice to put a lid on perversion of justice by corrupt Judge Ryland of
Central London County Court who had chosen to serve the legal MAFIA and
Jews than justice.
B. Duo, among evidence of series of improprieties in lower courts had
evidence before them that:-
(i) In the employment Tribunal the legal team for Vivianne Bella
Waldman, the director of my then former company, had pleaded that the
money for the work done for her personally that I claimed in the County
Court my then employer company did not owe that to me therefore the
company did not discriminate against me for non-payment of the amounts
due that I claimed in the County Courts; and
(ii) In the County Courts Vivianne Bella Waldman's legal team had
pleaded that the director did not owe that money personally but the
company whereas all the work done was carried out for the director
personally.
(C) As judges charged with the responsibility of making judicial
decisions according to the law and evidence the duo knew or ought to
have known that the evidence referred to paragraph B amounts to
contradictory evidence about the same matter and two contradictory
statements about the same factual issue could not be true at the same
time the duo did not set aside the decision of judge Ryland and allowed
injustice prevail.
(D) I believe the two were biased against me. My belief is
precipitated by the fact that: -
i. One has to be real idiot to find that two contradictory statements
about the same factual matter could be true at the same time
ii. There is evidence that Rachel Jean Harrap, solicitor for Vivianne
Bella Waldman secretly approached the Court staff, discussed the matter
with the court staffs secretly and handed over documents/information,
which has been kept from me. Even in the County Court John Russell,
Counsel appointed by Rachel Jean Harrap, who appeared to know that
Vivianne Bella Waldman was telling lies and was manufacturing evidence
including presenting a witness under false identity, had secretly
contacted judge Ryland and filed a large number of bundles of documents
on the day of the hearing about which my legal team was not aware and I
certainly did not know
iii. After perverting justice Tuckey LJ made threats to me in the name
of repercussions to my family, subsequent to which the freeholder of the
flat of my estranged wife made false bills against her and the same
judge who had been instrumental in conducive to perversion of justice
ploys in the Willesden County Court assisted the said freeholder thieve
my estranged wife [with the help of solicitors instructed by her] of
over £12,000 which she did not owe and the judge knew that [He had found
evidence filed by me an overwhelming defence after which she was
blackmailed that if she allowed me give evidence she will lose her
flat].
E. They actively and maliciously denied me a fair hearing and
butchered my human rights.
2. Neuberger LJ
A. On 23 July 2002 when he was a High Court he purported to hear my
application to the Court that a bankruptcy order on an un-served and
undisclosed Petition of Rachel Jean Harrap be set aside and to obstruct
justice he: -
i. Maliciously changed the course of action and treated my
application to set aside the decision made on undisclosed and un-served
petition of Rachel Jean Harrap entitled Mahajan v Rachel Jean Harrap as
Mahajan v Vivianne Bella Waldman.
ii. Produced all documents given to me as Mahajan v Vivianne Bella
Waldman and in official records recoded as Mahajan v Rachel Jean Harrap
about which I learnt in 2003 coincidentally.
B. Upon learning that the party against me is his fellow Jewish and
Chief Rabbi and Rabbis had been instrumental in influencing Jewish
judges secretly he turned into a beast, took his glasses off, turned his
eyes red and started hurling abuse at me.
C. To serve his fellow Jews and members of the legal/judicial
fraternities than justice he disregarded new evidence that emerged from
his personal knowledge vis-à-vis
i. Registrar to whim I had made an application to go behind the
judgement debt was secretly influenced to take himself off the case and
thus I was prejudiced
ii. Undisclosed and un-served Petition of Rachel Jean Harrap was said
to be heard by an unknown Deputy Registrar Jakes whose identity the
courts never disclosed to me
iii. Although records show that an unknown Deputy Registrar Jakes heard
an undisclosed and un-served petition of Rachel Jean Harrap the
bankruptcy order was made by a retired barrister Brettle.
D. He invented series of falsehoods to serve his fellow Jews and
members of the legal/judicial fraternities than justice, which are fully
explained in my appeal from his decision.
E. He actively and maliciously denied me a fair hearing and butchered
my human rights.
3. Aldous/Scott Baker LJJ
A. On 29 November 2002, the two purported to hear my appeal from the
decision of Neuberger J which was an appeal from the decision of the
lower court refusing to set aside a bankruptcy decision made on an
undisclosed and un-served petition of Rachel Jean Harrap some facts
about which are stated in paragraph 2 above but continuing a campaign to
pervert the course of justice the two justice prostituting monsters put
a lid on the fraud perpetrated by Neuberger J to serve his fellow Jews
and various corrupt members of the legal and judicial fraternities.
B. Aldous behaved in a manner for which any civilised person would be
reluctant to class him a human being.
C. Scott-Baker also obstructed justice in the matter of Mahajan v LB
Barnet from the decision of Eady J before whom a counsel impersonated to
be who he is not and Eady J had made a wholly perverse decision.
Evidence suggested that the masquerading counsel for the LB Barnet had
been in collusion with the Judge's associate who had been communicating
in sign language and had handed over for the court something secretly
about which I was not informed.
Scott-Baker presided over the matter when I had made complaints against
him and I was given the impression that Brooke LJ was going to hear the
matter, but Brooke LJ contemptuously left the court and after a frantic
search Scoot-Baker LJ was brought to the court who I believe came from a
pub and looked drunk.
Until this day no reasons for his decision have been provided to
me.
D. They actively and maliciously denied me fair hearings and
butchered my human rights.
4. Brooke/Sedley and Latham LJJ
A. On 12 December 2003, the above three purported to hear my three
appeals namely: -
i. Mahajan v VB Waldman and others from the decision of Patten J made
on 9 June 2003 under the Court of Appeal reference A3/2003/1329, which
concerns Patten J, who appears to have been in collusion to access
irrelevant matters to my prejudice, suppressing evidence and creating
opportunities to manufacture evidence to pervert the course of justice
against a decision of practising barrister Lloyds sitting as Deputy
Master it suspicious circumstance and dismissing my claim against eight
defendants including 2 barristers and 2 solicitors for Fraud, Perjury,
falsification of Evidence, conspiracy to obstruct justice, malicious
prosecution and malicious bankruptcy,
ii. Mahajan v VB Waldman and Others, under Court of Appeal reference
A3/2003/1329A from the decision of Ian Joseph of the Court of Appeal
made on 16 July 2003, which concerns Ian Joseph putting my appeal under
reference A3/2003/1329 in dismissal list for refusing to file
undesirable and irrelevant documents demanded by a Jewish staff of the
court who had taken over the matter in suspicious circumstances and was
behaving like a bully
iii. Mahajan v VB Waldman and Others, under Court of Appeal reference
A3/2203/2024 filed on 16 September 2003, which concerns Rimmer J finding
that the demand made by the High Court staffs were unlawful but had
refused to make an order for the costs incurred by me and had made
prejudicial, irrelevant and unsubstantiated remarks in his judgement
which were conducive to obstruction of justice;
And unlawfully, fraudulently, dishonestly and in a conspiratorial manner
dismissed my appeals when the evidence before them showed clearly-
* Patten J had imported evidence and his decision was not in the
interest of justice
* Rimer J found that the conduct on part High Court staff was
unlawful and he had my evidence that the staffs had been acting
maliciously whose conduct gives the appearance of them being
institutionally racists.
* Ian Joseph was supporting unlawful conduct of a Jewish staffs who
would appear to have taken over the matters allocated to other staffs,
obviously, to serve his fellow Jews and the demands he was making were
not lawful.
B. Brooke LJ conspired with his former chamber mate and appointed an
advocate to court about which he kept me in the dark and even did not
address my specific enquiries.
C. With callous disregard to the court advocate's advice that his
conduct amounted to violation of my Human Rights the trio went ahead to
make an Extended Restraint Order against me, but obviously knowing that
they were perverting justice against me gave me permission to set that
side.
D. Brooke LJ continued to interfere with my application dated 3
February 2004 in which I applied for an order to set aside the order of
12 December 2004 and also sough declaration of incompatibility of
various statutes with the community laws and Human Rights Act 1998.
E. Despite my specifically stating the statute and the rules Brooke
LJ repeatedly and manifestly wrongly stated that the court did not have
jurisdiction to determine an application for declaration of
incompatibility and actively obstructed justice. Subsequently he claimed
that he made mistakes yet he showed no decency to set right the wrongs
done to me. I now know he is a lair, corrupt, dishonest, morally
bankrupt, Human Rights butcher and a Perverter of justice criminal.
F. They actively and maliciously denied me a fair hearing and
butchered my human rights.
5. Areden and Sedly LJJ
A. On 5 March 2004, these two purported to hear my application dated
3 February 2004 and unlawfully refused to deal with my applications for
declarations of incompatibility
B. They imported evidence to show that I had not complied with the
conditions what the order of 12 December 2003 stipulated me to comply
whereas none were stated in the judgement of 12 December 2003.
C. They actively and maliciously denied me a fair hearing and
butchered my human rights.
6. Brooke, Dyson and Mance LJJ
A. On 28 and 30June 2004 the trio purported to hear my appeals in the
matters of
i. B1/2004/0996 Mahajan v The Department for Constitutional Affairs,
which concerned McKinnon J refusing to set aside an order of Master
Tennant who had struck out an action that I had issued with the
permission of Master Ungley of the High Court
ii. B1/2004/0292(A) The Queen on the application of Mahajan v Central
London County Court, which concerned a restraint order that Brooke LJ
and some other judges be restrained from hearing my substantive matters
and any other application that I ever made to the Court of Appeal for
the judges having acted maliciously against me in the past,
iii. B1/2004/0293(A) The Queen on the application of Mahajan v Central
London County Court, which concerned a restraint order that Brooke LJ
and some other judges be restrained from hearing my substantive matters
and any other application that I ever made to the Court of Appeal for
the judges having acted maliciously against me in the past,
iv. B1/2004/0996(A) Mahajan v The Department for Constitutional
Affairs. Application of Respondent for a general civil restraint order
made in a huff to maliciously pervert the course of justice to keep
under veil evil acts of various members of the legal and judicial
fraternities
v. B1/2004/0292 The Queen on the application of Mahajan v Central
London County Court. Application of Claimant for permission to appeal,
an extension of time and a stay of execution, which concerned a
fraudulent order made by Sullivan J be set aside and the court
considered my claim for Violation of Human Rights
vi. B1/2004/0293 The Queen on the application of Mahajan v Central
London County Court. Application of Claimant for permission to appeal,
an extension of time and a stay of execution, which concerned a
fraudulent order made by Sullivan J be set aside and the court
considered my claim for Violation of Human Rights
and served the Secretary of State than Justice when the court had
evidence before it which showed then as it shows now that:-
* Master Tennant had been influenced to make the order that is shown
made by him
* The order whish is said to be made by Master Tennant on court's
own volition was not made on the courts own volition but under unlawful
and criminal influence of the Secretary of State
* Treasury Solicitor had been untruthful
* Treasury Solicitor had abused his office for Extra Judicial
favours
* Application by the Respondent had no locus standi and was
frivolous, vexatious, scandalous and an Abuse of the Process.
* The Respondent had not made his case
* The Respondent with the support of conniving courts staffs and the
judges had obstructed a fair hearing to me by creating a situation that
I should not be able to file evidence to show that various decisions
made in the past against me on the basis of which the Respondent wanted
to seek an order against me are perverse and an outcome of frauds and
conspiracies by various corrupt judges which prevailed due to dishonest
conduct under the by above mentioned corrupt judges.
B. Although Mance LJ never heard the matter yet he lent his name to
the judgement published on the judgement. To keep this information from
me the copy of the transcript that the court gave to me shows names of
only Brooke and Dyson. I learnt that three judges have shown to made the
decision when the Judicial office of the House of Lords sent me a copy
printed from the secret website on which the Human Rights Butchers
assassinate characters of their victims.
C From the line of enquiry that Dyson LJ adopted which shut the evil
counsel for the Respondent and left her wondering like an idiot, Dyson
LJ knew that Brooke was acting maliciously yet he allowed a crook rape
justice than serve it and thus desecrated the sanctity of the office of
a judge who is supposed to be fair, independent, honest and fearless.
D. After the trio have raped justice the court manifestly denied me
copies of the transcript to prevent me from filing my Petitions in time
and sent me copies on a date that I should receive that only after I had
filed my petitions.
E. From the Transcripts I learnt that the hearings on 28 and 30 Junes
were a farce. In fact decisions had been made and secretly published
around a week before the date on which a drama of a public hearing was
being played.
F. Although matter B1/2004/0996 Mahajan v The Department for
Constitutional Affairs, has never been heard yet the perverters of
justice criminals have shown that matter heard and have published a
judgement on the secret website
G. They actively and maliciously denied me a fair hearing and
butchered my human rights.
7. Di Mambro, Ian Joseph and formerly Roger Venne
They have been behaving like gangsters and are abusing ethnic staffs to
accomplish their racist ambitions. They falsify evidence and even make a
fair hearing impossible by having the matters listed when the matters
are not even ready for hearing and many applications for hearing in half
an hour where likes of Brooke behave like scoundrels, lie, apply the law
wrongly and then pretend making mistakes. I believe they are a bunch of
most evil racists who should never be allowed to work in any Pubic
office. There are various other thugs who work behind the scene.
8. As a result of crimes of misuse of courts and perversion to
justice:
(1) I have been greatly injured in my credit reputation and have been
brought into scandal odium and contempt,
(2). I have suffered very substantial financial losses
(3). I was maliciously arrested and was assaulted by the Police who
have injured my right hand, which may have been injured for life
(4) I am being persecuted and LB Barnet has specifically been grateful
to Brooke LJ for that
(5). I am suffering prejudice in every walk of life
Ashok Mahajan
20 Ammanford Green
London NW9 7SA