IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CRIMINAL CONTEMPT JURISDICTION

CONTEMPT PETITION NO. ______ OF 2011

In Re: Amar Singh Contemnor

IN THE MATTER OF:

Shanti Bhushan Informant/Applicant

PAPER BOOK
(FOR INDEX KINDLY SEE INSIDE)

CR.M.P. NO. ______OF 2011

APPLICATION FOR EXEMPTION FROM FILING
OFFICIALLY TRANSLATED COPY OF ANNEXURE

Shanti Bhushan (In-person)

 INDEX

S.NO. PARTICULARS PAGE NO.

1. Listing perfroma

2. Contempt Petition with Affidavit

3. Annexure P1 – A copy of the present fabricated

CD

4. Annexure P2 - A copy of the 2006 Amar Singh

tapes CD

5. Annexure P3 -A copy of the report of the Truth Labs

6. Annexure P 4 -A copy of the transcript of the

conversation in the present fabricated CD

7. Annexure P5 A copy of the transcript of the

earlier 2006 Amar Singh tape along with

its translation

8. Annexure P6- A copy of the report of Mr. George

Papcun

9. Annexure P7-A copy of his resume showing

his credibility

10. Annexure P8 - Copy of the complaint dated

14/04/2011 made to Delhi Police

11. Annexure P9- Copy of the FIR dated 15/04/2011

12. Annexure P10. Copy of the receiving of the constable

13. Annexure P11- Copy of the CD containing the interview

Of Amar Singh on Aaaj Tak channel

14. Application for exemption from filing officially

translated copy of annexure

 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL CONTEMPT JURISDICTION
CONTEMPT PETITION NO. ______ OF 2011

In Re: Amar Singh,

27, Lodhi Road,
New Delhi Contemnor

IN THE MATTER OF:

Shanti Bhushan
S/o Late Vishvamitra
R/o B-16,
Sector-14,
Noida-201301 .Informant/Applicant

CONTEMPT PETITION UNDER RULE 3 (a) OF THE CONTEMPT OF

COURT ACT TO BE PLACED BEFORE THE HON’BLE CHIEF JUSTICE OF
INDIA FOR TAKING SUO MOTU COGNISANCE

To,

Hon’ble The Chief Justice of India and

his companion justices of the Supreme Court of India

Most respectfully showeth:

1. That the informant is filing the present petition to place before the

Hon’ble Chief Justice of India certain information with a prayer to

take suo motu cognizance and initiate contempt proceeding against

the alleged contemnor. The informant is approaching this Hon’ble

Court as one CD purportedly containing a completely fabricated

conversation between the Informant, Mulayam Singh Yadav and Amar

Singh which clearly cast aspersion on the judiciary has been

circulated among the media. The alleged contents of the CD has been

fabricated with a malicious intention to interfere with the

administration of justice as it tries to create an impression that a

particular bench of this Hon’ble Court (one of judges of this Hon’ble

Court has been named in the CD by the contemnor) can be managed

through the informant’s son. The object behind fabricating the said
 CD is quite sinister as the attempt is apparently to derail the hearing

of all important cases being/have been argued by the informant’s son

before that particular bench of this Hon’ble Court and thus, interfere

with the administration of justice and to attempt to interfere with the

continued hearing/ judgment in important cases of public interest

where judgment has been reserved by that particular bench. It may

be mentioned that one of the public interest cases in which judgment

has been reserved by the particular bench is the case relating to the

release in the public domain of the contemnor’s tape recorded

conversations. The contemnor in the said writ petition had prayed

that the tape recorded conversation may not be released. The attempt

seems to be to try and make the judge recuse himself from the case by

adding his name and suggesting that Mr. Prashant Bhushan is on

very good terms with the judge and is in a position to influence him.

This is totally false and scurrilous suggestion, is a clear attempt to

embarrass the judge and to interfere with the administration of

justice.

2. The fact that the CD is totally fabricated has become apparent from

the forensic report of two different renowned Labs. One of them is the

Truth Lab Hyderabad which is headed by Shri S.R. Singh who is the

former Director of the CFSL. The advisory committee of the

organization is chaired by Justice M N Venkatachaliah, former Chief

Justice of India. The Truth Lab has opined that the conversation in

the CD is not genuine and has been created by splicing different

conversations. It has also opined that some parts of the conversation

are lifted from an earlier conversation between Shri Amar Singh and

Shri Mulayam Singh Yadav, which conversation is part of a CD which

has been already filed since 2006 and is part of the Court record in

the Amar Singh Tapes case.

To quote from the report;

 On the basis of auditory analysis by critical listening and

subsequent waveform and spectrographic analysis of questioned

voice marked ‘Exhibit – Q’ and specific utterances marked as

‘MSQ1’ and ‘MS.S1’, it is concluded that

1. The voice utterances marked as ‘MSQ1’ and ‘MS.S1’

are identical and originated from a common source.

2. There are discontinuities and breaks in the audio

recording in ‘Exhibit – Q’, indicating that the questioned

digital recordings are the result of fabricated conversation

between three persons.

3. On critical listening followed by the visual inspection

of sound wave patterns clearly indicate that a substantial

part of the recordings are electronically copied to build up

and fabricate the questioned recordings. In part (a), two

bits of conversation of speaker-2, in part (b), three bits of

conversation of speaker-2 and in part (c), the entire

conversation between speaker-1 and speaker-2 were found

to be originated from common source. The common origin of

conversations in Exhibit – Q and Exhibit – S relating to

speaker-1 and speaker-2 indicate that these conversations

were the source from which the questioned recordings were

built up.

A copy of the present fabricated CD is annexed hereto and marked as

Annexure P1 and a copy of the 2006 Amar Singh tapes CD is

annexed hereto and marked as Annexure P2. A copy of the report of

the Truth Labs is annexed hereto and marked as Annexure P3. A

copy of the transcript of the conversation in the present fabricated CD

is annexed hereto and marked as Annexure P4 and a copy of the

transcript of the earlier 2006 Amar Singh tape along with its
translation is annexed hereto and marked as Annexure P5. A

comparison of the two tapes would show that some portions of Mr.

Mulayam Singh and Mr. Amar Singh conversation from earlier Amar

Singh tapes has been bodily lifted and spliced to fabricate and create

the present CD.

To quote relevant extracts from Amar Singh’s tape of 2006;

“ Mulayam Singh: Hello

Amar Singh: Han. Pranam.

Mulayam Singh: Han chailye theak hai.

Amar Singh: ji?

Mulayam Singh: Main sun raha tha lagatar.

Amar Singh: ant main bhi bol diya.

Mulayam Singh: haan, aachkami….chalo theak hai

Amar Singh: a

Maulayam Singh: lekin ek baat bhul gaye aap;

Amar Singh: hun

Mulayam Singh: ye sujhao nahi the, aadesh hain kehte aapne

jaise padhe hain;

Amar Singh: haan;

Mulayam Singh: ab inko kaun samjhaaye chaahe grih

mantri ho chahe koi ho aira gaera, inko kya samjhaya jaye”

To quote relevant extracts from the CD in question;

“ Mulayam Singh(MS): Hello… hello..

Amar Singh(AS): Netaji aap toh jante hi hain ye.. shanti

bhushan ji ko (MS- hmm)… bagal mein baithe huye hain, (MS-

haan) prashant bhushan inhi ke ladke hain PIL wagerha karte

hain, (MS- haan) famous hain bahaut, woh bhi achhe khaase

waqeel hain (MS- hmm) kah rahe thhe agra waale matter ke

liye… Justice Sanghvi se unka bahaut achha hai (MS-haan) aur

woh kaam karaa denge (MS-bahaut achha -kiya) ye aap inse

 baat kar lijiye khud hee… jo uchit samjhein aap kar lijiye (MS-

theek hai)

Mulayam Singh: haalo

SHANTI BHUSHAN(SB): dekhiye Prashant PIL karte hain.. (MS-

hmm) usse kuchh kamaate nahi (MS-

-haan) dekhiye humne sab story sunli (MS-hmm)... ek hee

tareeka hai, Prashant bahaut achha manage -karte hain (MS-

theek hai) iske liye bahaut zyaada paise ki zaroorat nahi hai

chaar crore rupiya bahaut hai (background unintelligible)

dekhiye ye toh majboori hai bhardwaj wo khud hee corrupt

hain (MS: theek hai) chief justice of india to yeh toh judge

banane ke liye kehte hain ki achha itte lakh rupiya le aao main

tumhe judge banwaa doo(voice cut).

Mulayam Singh: ab inko kaun samjhaaye chaahe grih

mantri ho chahe koi ho aira gaera, inko kya samjhaya jaye”

Apart from the above, there are other conversations also which have

been bodily lifted from the Amar Singh’s tape of 2006.

3. The other Lab which has given its report is by the renowned

international expert in the field namely Mr. George Papcun of Sound

Evidence, USA who has been employed by Los Alamos National

Laboratory, the Aerospace Corporation and the University of

California Phonetics Laboratory. George Papcun, PhD, has opined that

it has “discontinuities” which show that “the recording is not an

authentic and valid representation of an original conversation”. Even

a preliminary examination by Dr Papcun has shown up tampering in

at least five critical places in Mr Shanti Bhushan’s speech. A copy of

the report of Mr. George Papcun is annexed hereto and marked as

Annexure P6. A copy of his resume showing his credibility is

annexed hereto and marked as Annexure P7.

4. It is submitted that once it becomes clear that the CD is fabricated

the question then arises as to who has fabricated this CD. It seems
 clear that Mr. Amar Singh must be involved in this fabrication as he

states in the purported conversation that Mr. Shanti Bhushan is

sitting with him. The fact of the matter is that the informant has

never met the alleged contemnor and therefore if this sentence is

continuous and is, as it seems to be in Mr. Amar Singh’s voice then

clearly Mr. Amar Singh has either engineered the CD or has

cooperated in its fabrication. Thus, he has been made an alleged

contemnor in this information which is being led before this Hon’ble

Court.

5. Further such a CD could only have been made with the help of

various other persons including experts in the field and this is the

result of a clear conspiracy. It is thus imperative that an investigation

be directed to be done by this Hon’ble Court by a Special Investigation

Team which will investigate into the matter and establish as to who

are the persons involved in this serious conspiracy to interfere in the

administration of justice.

6. It is submitted that the act of fabricating the CD and then sending it

anonymously to various news channels and newspapers is a serious

attempt to bring not only the informant but also the judiciary under

cloud and needs to be taken serious cognizance of. It may also be

pointed out that the very fact that the police to whom an FIR was

lodged by the informant about the fabrication of the CD has till the

evening of 17th April, 2011 not managed to get the copy of the CD

despite the fact that it seems to be circulating freely among all

sections of the media. It is only after the press conference which was

done by Mr. Prashant Bhushan in the evening of 17/04/2011 one

constable came around 8:15 pm in the night and collected the CD.

Copy of the complaint dated 14/04/2011 made to Delhi Police is

annexed hereto as Annexure P8. Copy of the FIR dated 15/04/2011

registered on the informant’s complaint is annexed hereto as

Annexure P9. Copy of the receiving of the constable is annexed hereto

 as Annexure P10. Clearly the attempt seems to be to not take the

complaint seriously and to not investigate the matter seriously. This

may be at the behest of powerful interests which have very high

stakes not only in the 2G case which has been reserved by a Bench

presided over by the judge named in the fabricated CD but also

against the Anti Corruption Law (Lokpal Bill) which is under drafting.

The informant has therefore a genuine apprehension that the Police

on its own may not do genuine or complete investigation into the

matter and thus the requirement of entrusting the investigation into

this very serious matter to a special investigating team to be formed

by this Hon’ble Court.

7. It would be pertinent hereto mention that on 17th April 2011 the

contemnor in an interview in Aaaj Tak channel which was recorded in

the morning and telecast at 8 pm in the night has clearly suggested

that in view of the disclosure in the CD in question it would not be

proper for the judge named in the CD to lift the ban over making the

contents of his CD public. This further corroborates the

aforementioned submission of the informant/applicant. Copy of the

CD containing the said interview of Amar Singh is annexed hereto as

Annexure P11.

That it is therefore most respectfully prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be

pleased to :

PRAYER

a) initiate suo moto contempt proceedings against the alleged

contemnor;

b) direct investigation into the matter by a special investigation team to

find out as to who all are the persons involved in the fabrication of the

CD or its dissemination;
c) initiate contempt proceedings against all persons found involved in

the said conspiracy of fabricating the CD and punish all such persons

for contempt of court; and

e) pass any other or further order/s as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit

or proper.

(Shanti Bhushan)

Senior Advocate

Applicant-in-person

18/4/11
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
(Criminal Contempt Jurisdiction)
Contempt Petition NO._____ OF 2011

In Re: Amar Singh, 27, Lodhi Road, New Delhi Contemnor

IN THE MATTER OF:

Shanti Bhushan .Informant/Applicant

AFFIDAVIT

I, Shanti Bhushan, S/o Late Vishwamitra, B-16, Sector 14, Noida, do

hereby solemnly state and affirm as under:

1. That I am the Informant/applicant and being familiar with the facts

and circumstances of the case and am competent and authorized to

swear this Affidavit.

2. That I have read and understood the accompanying contempt petition

and I state that the contents of the petition are correct to the best of

my knowledge and based on information from the reliable sources

which I believe to be true.

3. That the annexure annexed to the Petition is true copy of its

respective original.

DEPONENT
VERIFICATION:

I, the above named Deponent, do hereby verify that the contents of

the above Affidavit are true and correct to my knowledge, no part of it is

false and nothing material has been concealed there from.

Verified at New Delhi on this 18th day of April 2011.

DEPONENT
 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
(Criminal Contempt Jurisdiction)
Cr. M.P. No. ____ of 2011
In
Contempt Petition NO._____ OF 2011

In Re: Amar Singh, 27, Lodhi Road, New Delhi Contemnor

IN THE MATTER OF:

Shanti Bhushan .Informant/Applicant

APPLICATION FOR EXEMPTION FROM FILING OFFICIALLY

TRANSLATED COPY OF ANNEXURE P 5

To,

The Hon’ble Chief Justice of India

And his companion Justices of the Supreme Court of India

The humble application of the appellant above named

1. The present contempt application is being filed to place before the

Hon’ble Chief Justice of India certain information with a prayer to

take suo motu cognizance and initiate contempt proceeding against

the alleged contemnor. The informant is approaching this Hon’ble

Court as one CD purportedly containing a completely fabricated

conversation between the Informant, Mulayam Singh Yadav and Amar

Singh which clearly cast aspersion on the judiciary has been

circulated among the media. The alleged contents of the CD has been

fabricated with a malicious intention to interfere with the

administration of justice as it tries to create an impression that a

particular bench of this Hon’ble Court (one of judges of this Hon’ble

Court has been named in the CD by the contemnor) can be managed

 through the informant’s son. The object behind fabricating the said

CD is quite sinister as the attempt is apparently to derail the hearing

of all important cases being/have been argued by the informant’s son

before that particular bench of this Hon’ble Court and thus, interfere

with the administration of justice and to attempt to interfere with the

continued hearing/ judgment in important cases of public interest

where judgment has been reserved by that particular bench.

2. That the aplicant has annexed Annexure P 5 along with above

mentioned petition which is in Hindi. Due to paucity of time, the

Petitioner could not get the translation of the said annexure done

from the official translator. However, the translation has been done by

a person who is well conversant with both the languages.

PRAYER

It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be

pleased to:

a) exempt the applicant from filing officially translated copies of Annexure P

5; and

b) pass any other order or further order/s this Hon’ble Court may deem fit

and proper.

Applicant-in-person

NEW DELHI

DT. 18/4/11
 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
(Criminal Contempt Jurisdiction)
Contempt Petition NO._____ OF 2011

In Re: Amar Singh, 27, Lodhi Road, New Delhi Contemnor

IN THE MATTER OF:

Shanti Bhushan .Informant/Applicant

AFFIDAVIT

I, Shanti Bhushan, S/o Late Vishwamitra, B-16, Sector 14, Noida, do

hereby solemnly state and affirm as under:

1. That I am the Informant/applicant and being familiar with the facts

and circumstances of the case and am competent and authorized to

swear this Affidavit.

2. That I have read and understood the accompanying application and I

state that the contents of the application are correct and true to the

best of my knowledge.

DEPONENT
VERIFICATION:

I, the above named Deponent, do hereby verify that the contents of

the above Affidavit are true and correct to my knowledge, no part of it is

false and nothing material has been concealed there from.

Verified at New Delhi on this ______ day of __________ 2011.

DEPONENT