United States Department of Justice🔗

Washington, D.C., May 24, 2013 20

To all to whom these presents shall come, Greeting:

I certify That Davon Allen whose names

are signed to the accompanying paper, are now, and were at the time of signing the same,

Deputy Clerk, for the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan

duly commissioned and qualified.

In witness whereof, I, Eric Holder

Attorney General of the United States, have hereunto caused

the Seal of the Department of Justice to be affixed and my

name to be attested by the Deputy Assistant Attorney General

for Administration, of the said Department on the day and

year first above written.

Attorney General

By

Deputy Assistant Attorney General for Administration

FORM DOJ-496 MAR 96

This by itself disproves the whole allegations and charge of rape as baseless as the false rape accuser herself admits in her own email, which was also produced as Court evidence, that no kind of sexual relationship itself existed between her and Paramahamsa Nithyananda. Then where is the question of she being raped over 120 times? The accomplice Vinay Bharadwaj was convicted of child rape.

Above document: Vinay Bharadwaj - felony charges of child molestation

In a desperate attempt to avoid criminal prosecution and jail for his crimes against a minor NRI girl, Vinay Bharadwaj concocted the same false case on Paramahamsa Nithyananda in USA alleging unnatural sexual abuse. The USA Court dismissed this false case, seeing the blatantly false and malicious nature of the case and even ordered Vinay Bharadwaj to pay the entire fees and court proceeding costs to Paramahamsa Nithyananda and the US organizations.

1 23. This most recent misuse of discovery is considered alongside Plaintiff's extensive history 2 of discovery abuse in this case. The Court's file is replete with evidence of continuous use of 3 dilatory tactics and misuse of discovery by Plaintiff. For example: 4 a. Plaintiff commenced this action on January 3, 2011. On two separate occasions, 5 October 19, 2011 and then November 17, 2011, Plaintiff tried to stay this action 6 pending the resolution of his criminal case in Washington, without success. 7 b. Also, Plaintiff repeatedly failed and refused to appear for deposition, which was 8 first noticed for April 20, 2011. This caused Defendants to file a Motion to Compel 9 and resulted in sanctions against Plaintiff and a Court Order for his deposition, which 10 he violated. Defendants then filed a Motion for Terminating Sanctions which led to 11 another Court Order on January 5, 2012 for Plaintiff's deposition, which finally took 12 place on February 14, 2012 nearly one year after it was first noticed. 13 c. On May 4, 2012, Plaintiff filed a frivolous Motion for Protective Order to delay 14 the deposition of a third party witness Yamini Nerurkar. The Motion was denied and 15 Plaintiff was sanctioned. 16 d. Recently, on November 6, 2012, this Court granted three Motions to Compel 17 discovery against Plaintiff, two of which were unopposed. The Motions concerned 18 discovery that was due and outstanding well before Plaintiff's criminal trial. 19 24. Plaintiff's persistent failure and refusal to comply with discovery in this case results in 20 the presumption, as a matter of law, that his asserted causes of action are without merit. 21 25. Accordingly, it is in the interests of justice that Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint 22 be dismissed with prejudice as against the Defendants. 23 THEREFORE, IT IS SO ORDERED THAT Defendants' Motion for Terminating Sanctions 24 and/or Issues Sanctions is GRANTED and that Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint is dismissed 25 with prejudice as against Defendants Nithyananda Foundation, Life Bliss Foundation, Gopal Reddy 26 Sheelum, Siva Vallabhanem, Raghu Vattabhanem, International Governing Body Commission of 27 Nithyananda Dhyanapeetam and Nithyananda Mission, Ma Nithya Sadhananda, and Nithyananda 28 Dhyanapeetam Temple & Cultural Center.

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR TERMINATING AND/OR ISSUE SACTIONS; REQUEST FOR MONETARY SANCTIONS

USA Court dismissed this false case and ordered the child molester Vinay Bharadwaj to pay the entire fees and court proceeding costs to Paramahamsa Nithyananda

(7). The ‘Sex Scandal’ Video On Which Basis The Case Originated Itself Is Fabricated

Our investigative team went through all the materials on record in the case, starting from the genesis of the case – the complaint against Paramahamsa Nithyananda. The entire First Information Report (FIR) and complaint even if accepted at its face value, do not disclose the ingredients of the alleged offence.

The complaint is filed by one Lenin Karuppan, an accomplice of the false rape accuser. There is no mention of even the word ‘rape’ in it. There is no rape victim even named in the complaint. Legal experts disclose that this is the first case in the history of independent India that a case of rape has been filed with no victim, named or unnamed! If at all there can be any interpretation of anything close to sexual offence in the complaint, it is the reference to a video showing Paramahamsa Nithyananda allegedly with an actress in an intimate position.

The video itself is false and fabricated for ulterior motives has been proved by:

Sunday 21 February 2016 News updated at 1:15 PM IST

Google Custom Search

Home | News | New Delhi | Business | Supplements | Sports | Entertainment

ks ED probe over watch Govt begins reservation of projects for SC/ST contractors

You are here: Home » State » CD featuring Nithyananda and me morphed: Ranjitha