Sl No :


File Code

001 The functions/duties of Intelligence Bureau: (To be downloaded from 'mha.nic.in')  

Fraud on Intelligence Bureau by Govt. of Karnataka in conspiracy with Judges of High Court of Karnataka: Land Acquisition for its Karnataka Branch called as Subsidiary Intelligence Bureau

003 Will the IB fail to unearth the Frauds committed by Supreme Court and High Court Judges  and their misdemeanours explained in this website; so as to enable the President of India, Parliament of India, Law Minister and Home Minister not to leave behind the Chief Justice of India to act against them?  
004 Is it not failure of IB or SIB to put the Govt. of Karnataka to the terms of Agreement or is it the failure of the advocates of these authorities?  
005 Union of India in 1985 delegated the Power of Acquistion of Land or Property for Central Govt. to Govt. of Karnataka. [019.01] 
006 In the High Court the Govt. of Karnataka supressed the delegated power by Union of India to illegally or for ulterior motives suppressed the delegated power because of which the Land Acquisition was struck down by High Court. [009.06] 
007 Chief Justice of Karnataka Mr. R.P.Sethi (who became Supreme Court Judge) and Justice K.R.Prasad Rao who are illegal members of Fraud Housing Society by striking down the acquistion for SIB; said malafide acquisition for Fraud Housing Society is bonafide and whereas bonafide acquisition for SIB as malafide. Govt. of Karnataka which was initmated of the amendment to L.A.Act made by parliament in 1984; it supressed illegally in the court proceedings. [009.06][019.11][019.01][019.12]
008 If Dawood Ibrahim so called underworld evading to surrender to law; the judges of Supreme Court and High court are acting as "over world" with impunity and are "Constitutional Enemies" of India within India.   [014.06]
009 It is suspected either or both viz. the land owner and the Govt. of Karnataka do not want the IB to be housed in center of city or the land owner has already entered into agreement with some underworld dons to sell the said property at higher price than granted as compensation in acquisition. This suspicion is based on the SLAO asking SIB on 23rd January 2001; whether the SIB wants the said property or not. The scanned copy of reply of SIB which reiterated that the property is required. [009.03s]