APPEAL BY WAY OF MOTION AGAINST THE LODGEMENT ORDER DATED 16.02.2017 VIDE D.NO.3913 OF 2017 ISSUED BY REGISTRAR SUPREME COURT OF INDIA UNDER ORDER XV RULE 5 OF THE SUPREME COURT RULES, 2013.

1. FILING INDEX
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
CRL.M.P. NO. OF 2017
IN
WRIT PETITION CRIMINAL NO. OF 2017 D.NO.3913
WITH
WRIT PETITION CRIMINAL NO.OF 2017 D.NO.2188
WITH
WRIT PETITION CRIMINAL NO.136 OF 2016
AND
WRIT PETITON CIVIL NO. 90 OF 2016
IN THE MATTER OF:
OM PRAKASH & ANR ……..PETITIONER
VERSUS
REGISTRAR ….RESPONDENT
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA & ANR
S.N Particulars Copies Court Fees
1. Memo of Appearance 1
2. Appeal with Affidavit 1+3
3. Annexure P-1 1+3
Petitioner in Person
Filed on: 20.02.2017 (Om Prakash)
Diary No: 16166
(Widow Asha Rani Devi)
On behalf of Petitioner No.02
RZF-893, NETAJI SUBUSH
MARG, RAJ NAGAR PART-2
PALAM COLONY, NEW DELHI-77
DWARKA SEC-08
MOB: 9968337815
E-mail: om.poddar@gmail.com

2. IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
CRL.M.P. NO. OF 2017
IN
WRIT PETITION CRIMINAL NO.OF 2017 D.NO.3913
WITH
WRIT PETITION CRIMINAL NO.OF 2017 D.NO.2188
WITH
WRIT PETITION CRIMINAL NO.136 OF 2016
AND
WRIT PETITON CIVIL NO. 90 OF 2016
IN THE MATTER OF:
OM PRAKASH & ANR ……..PETITIONER
VERSUS
REGISTRAR ….RESPONDENT
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA & ANR
APPEAL BY WAY OF MOTION AGAINST THE
LODGEMENT ORDER DATED 16.02.2017 VIDE
D.NO.3913 OF 2017 ISSUED BY REGISTRAR
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA UNDER ORDER XV RULE
5 OF THE SUPREME COURT RULES, 2013.
To
Hon'ble the Chief Justice of India and
His Lordship's Companion Justices of
the Supreme Court of India. The
Humble petition of the Petitioner
abovenamed.
MOST RESPECFULLY SHOWETH:
1. That the present petition under
Article 32 of the Constitution of India is being
filed to enforce the Rights under Article 21 of
the Constitution of India with Writ Petition

3. Criminal vide D.NO. 3913 of 2017, Writ Petition
Criminal vide D.NO. 2188 of 2017, Writ Petition
Criminal 136 of 2016 and Writ Petition Civil 90 of
2016; whereby Registrar (J-I) of this Hon’ble
court has refused to register Writ Petition
(Criminal) No………. of 2017 (D.No. 3913) under
Article 32 of Constitution of India titled as “Om
Prakash & Anr Vs. Registrar, Supreme Court of
India & Anr” on the ground of no reasonable cause
received for registration under order XV, Rule 5
of the Supreme Court Rules, 2013 which has
suspended the fundamental rights of the
petitioners under Article 21 and closed the door
of this Hon’ble Court for the petitioners
forever, the contents of which are requested to be
read as part of this application, as the same are
not being repeated here for the sake of brevity.
2. That the Lodgement Order dated
16.02.2017 vide diary no. 3913 of 2017 issued by
Registrar, Supreme Court of India under Order XV
Rule 5 of the Supreme Court Rules, 2013 has been
annexed herein as Annexure P-1 (Page from 12 to
14).
3. That the Lodgement Order dated 16.02.2017 of
Registrar, Supreme Court of India has thoroughly

4. misconceived that the main grounds espoused by the
petitioners are that the Registrar did not have
power to refuse registration of the earlier Writ
petition filed by the petitioner under the
provision of Order XV, Rule 5 of Supreme Court
Rules, 2013, the petition having been diarized as
Diary No. 2188 of 2017.
4. That the provision of Order XV, Rule 5 of
Supreme Court Rules, 2013 clearly stipulates, “The
Registrar may refuse to receive a petition on the
ground that it discloses no reasonable cause or is
frivolous or contains scandalous matter but the
petitioner may within fifteen days of the making of
such order, appeal by way of motion, from such
refusal to the Court”.
5. That the main ground espoused by the
petitioners are that the Registrar of this Hon’ble
Court has thoroughly abused his power under the
provision of Order XV, Rule 5 of Supreme Court
Rules, 2013 and has intentionally ignored the valid
new reasonable cause/findings in the garb of no
reasonable cause/same findings to be received for
registration under Order XV Rule 5 of the Supreme
Court Rules, 2013 to protect and shield the bad
elements of state apparatus and to offend, harass,

5. victimize, infringe constitutional right of
petitioners, suspend the right to life or personal
liberty of the petitioners.
6. That the Lodgement Order dated 16.02.2017
of Registrar, Supreme Court of India has thoroughly
misconceived that the petition is not permissible
in law; an Statutory appeal, instead should have
been filed by the petitioners.
7. That the Registrar, Supreme Court of India has
failed to take into account that his Lodgement
Orders dated 28.01.2017 and 16.02.2017 have awarded
Capital punishment/death penalty to the petitioners
indirectly without a written Judicial Order of this
final Court. Moreover, in absence of written
Judicial Order of Capital Punishment, the
petitioners cannot now even move for mercy petition
before Hon’ble the President of India.
8. That the Lodgement Order dated 16.02.2017 of
Registrar, Supreme Court of India has thoroughly
misconceived that Writ petition is not permissible
in law, however “Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 137
of 2010 in C. Muniappan & ORS VS. The Registrar of
Supreme Court of India, Writ Petition (Criminal)
No. 52 of 2011 in B.A. Umesh VS. The Registrar of

6. Supreme Court of India, Writ Petition (Criminal)
No. 77 of 2014 in Mohd. Arif @ Ashfaq VS. The
Registrar of Supreme Court of India & ORS, Writ
(Criminal) 108 of 2014 in Yakub Abdul Razak Menon
VS. The Registrar of Supreme Court of India & ORS”
has been permitted in law by this Hon’ble Court.
9. That being aggrieved by the order dated
16.02.2017 of Registrar (J-I) of this Hon’ble
Court, the petitioner is challenging the same on
the following amongst other grounds: -
a)BECAUSE the Writ petition is permissible and
maintainable in law as the same has been
permitted by this Hon’ble Court in the past in
number of cases with citation under para 8 of
this appeal.
b)BECAUSE there is a sheer violation of set
practice, procedure and rules against Writ
Criminal 136 of 2016 by the Registry of this
Hon’ble Court as laid down in the Handbook of
this Hon’ble Court to stop the petitioner no.
02 to agitate the matter before Hon’ble the
Chief Justice of India’s Court.

7. c)BECAUSE the Registry has circulated an
application for Constitution bench unregistered
in Writ Criminal 136 of 2016 and forcibly
pushed the petitioner into Curative Stage.
d)BECAUSE a well-designed criminal conspiracy
being commissioned and strategy being adopted
against the petitioners by the Quasi-Judicial
Officer of this Hon’ble Court since 03.10.2016
to spoil the valid ground of Constitution bench
against the Writ Petition Criminal 136 of 2016
and make it liable to be dismissed with liberty
by this Hon’ble Court and to close the door of
this Hon’ble Court under Article 32 for
enforcement of guaranteed fundamental right of
the petitioner under Article 21.
e)BECAUSE the petitioners have been subjected to
violation of principle of Natural Justice by
this Hon’ble Court who approached this Hon’ble
Apex Court under Article 32 against rampant
atrocities by the state apparatus in two states
and for enforcement of his fundamental rights
under Article 21.
f)BECAUSE the petitioners are NOT re-agitating
the same petition however petitioners have been

8. stopped by this Hon’ble Court since 03.10.2016
to agitate the matter at right place before
Hon’ble the Chief Justice of India’s Court as
per the set practice, procedure and rules of
this Hon’ble Court.
g)BECAUSE new reasonable cause and new findings
have arisen and resulted by this Hon’ble Court.
h)BECAUSE there is evasion of Order XXXVIII of
Supreme Court Rules 2013 against Writ Criminal
136 of 2016 by two judges’ bench.
i)BECAUSE there is likelihood of bias against
Writ Criminal 136 of 2016 by the two judges’
bench as laid down in the Yadav Vs. State of
Haryana AIR 1987 SC 454.
j)BECAUSE the petitioners have NOT afforded
liberty to approach Patna High Court in Writ
Petition Criminal 136 of 2016, instead the
petitioners have lodged strong protest against
it in the open Court and this Order suffers
from biased and prejudiced judgment by two
judges’ bench of this Hon’ble Court.

9. k)BECAUSE there is sheer violation of
Constitutional Law by this Order and petition
raised substantial question of law as to the
interpretation of the Constitution required and
to be decided by a division court of not less
than five judges.
l)BECAUSE this biased Order awards Capital
Punishment/Death Penalty to the petitioners
indirectly.
m)BECAUSE an offence of perjury by the Lower
Court and bad elements of two State Apparatus
have been placed on record in the petition who
have been posing imminent danger to the life or
personal liberty of the petitioners and
affecting the administration of Justice
delivered by the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in
2013.
n)BECAUSE this Hon’ble Court is shielding and
protecting the bad elements of State Apparatus
and offending, harassing, victimizing, awarding
Capital Punishment/Death Penalty without
written Judicial Order indirectly through
violating, evading the Rule of Law initially
and through issuing Lodgment Orders lately,

10. suspending the life or personal liberty of the
petitioners.
PRAYER
It is most respectfully prayed that this Hon’ble
Court may be pleased to:
(a) To Set aside the Lodgment order dated
16.02.2017 of Registrar Supreme Court of India
and pass an order for registration of the same
and allow the petitioners to agitate the matter
urgently before Hon’ble the Chief Justice of
India’s Court for urgent relief.
b) Pass such other order/orders as this Hon'ble
Court may deem just and proper in the facts
and circumstances of the case.
DRAWN & FILED BY:
PETITIONER IN PERSON
OM PRAKASH
NEW DELHI:
FILED ON : .02.2017.
(WIDOW ASHA RANI DEVI)
ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER NO.02

11. IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
CRL.M.P. NO. OF 2017
IN
WRIT PETITION CRIMINAL NO.OF 2017 D.NO.3913
WITH
WRIT PETITION CRIMINAL NO.OF 2017 D.NO.2188
WITH
WRIT PETITION CRIMINAL NO.136 OF 2016
AND
WRIT PETITON CIVIL NO. 90 OF 2016
IN THE MATTER OF:
OM PRAKASH & ANR ……..PETITIONER
VERSUS
REGISTRAR ….RESPONDENT
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA & ANR
AFFIDAVIT
I, Om Prakash S/o Late D. N. Poddar, aged 44 years,
R/o RZF/893, Netaji Subash Marg, Raj Nagar Part-II,
Palam Colony, New Delhi - 77, do hereby solemnly
affirm and state on oath as under:-
1.That I am the Petitioner in the above matter
and well conversant with the facts of the case
as such competent to swear this affidavit.
2. That the contents of the accompanying appeal by
way of motion against the Lodgment Order dated
16.02.2017 of Registrar Supreme Court of India
vide D.NO. 3913 of 2017 under Order XV Rule 5
of the Supreme Court Rules, 2013, which has

12. been drafted by me [para 01 to 09.], [Page 01
to 14] and I, As. and having understood the
contents thereof I say that the facts state
therein are correct which are based on the
official record.
3. That the accompanying appeal by way of motion
against the Lodgment Order dated 16.02.2017 of
Registrar Supreme Court of India total 14
pages.’
DEPONENT
VERIFICATION:
I, the above-named deponent do hereby verify that
the facts stated in the above affidavit are true to
my knowledge and belief. No part of the same is
false and nothing material has been concealed
therefrom.
Verified at New Delhi on this the 20th
day of
February, 2017.
DEPONENT