The complete guide on the Justice Loya verdict- the caravan of lies stripped naked.

1.)  How did the Supreme Court come to the conclusion that Judge Loya died a natural death without any enquiry?

2.)  What, after all, was the harm in ordering and enquiry? An enquiry would have established the truth beyond any doubt.

The above are questions being raised by several detractors of the judgment delivered in the Judge Loya case by the Hon’ble Supreme Court and seem pretty reasonable, on the face of it. However, a careful study of the judgment shows how totally unreasonable such claims are and how far away from the truth the doubts raised about the death are. It is important to conclusively and authoritatively answer the questions raised on the judgment not only to remove doubts from people’s minds on this important case but also to restore faith in judiciary, which is getting dented due to a multiplicity of factors.

A few things need to be made clear while talking about this judgment:

Firstly and most importantly, it has to be made clear that the three Supreme Court judges, during the course of the trial, did conduct a fair enquiry in the death of the Judge Loya and looked into each and every minute detail of the case. So, the conclusion of natural death has been reached after a fair enquiry and not without any enquiry!

In this enquiry they found not a “tittle of proof” to conclude an unnatural death.

The petitioners provided absolutely no evidence to substantiate the charge of murder.

All that they provided was the story of Caravan magazine which raise several disturbing questions, about the whole incident.

So, the crux of the case revolved around looking into each of these questions and evaluating if there was a satisfactory explanation to each one of them or if any of them required any further investigation. To reach a fair and unbiased conclusion I would recommend everyone to personally read the entire judgment – it would not take you more than 2-3 hours. However, if for any reason you cannot read the judgment then the next best thing to do is to read this article – it gives u a comprehensive and truthful summary of the judgment.

In the paras that follow, I have listed out each of the questions/suspicions raised (totally 23 of them), and the findings of the Supreme Court along with the explanations for each one of them. Bear the length of the write-up for it attempts to summarize 114 pages of judgment into 2-3 pages of this article.

Questions about his Stay in the Ravi Bhawan Guest house at Nagpur.

Q1. Only Judge Kulkarni’s name is recorded in the register at Ravi Bhawan.

Q2. Why and how would three judges stay in the same room at Ravi Bhawan

 Implications / Suspicions of these Questions

  • That either Judge Loya did not stay at Ravi Bhawan; or
  • That Judge Loya did not stay in the same room.
  • Findings of the Supreme Court (with explanations added from my side for clarity)


1.) Judge Loya travelled from Mumbai (departed 29th November 2014) to Nagpur (reached 30th November 2014) by train along with, Sri Kulkarni (Member Secretary, Maharashtra State Legal Services Authority) and Sri Modak (Principal District Judge, Pune).

2.) They travelled together, stayed together at Ravi Bhawan went to the wedding, for which they were invited to Nagpur, together, and came back Ravi Bhawan together after meeting multiple people among whom were several other judges and guests.

3.) When Judge Loya complained of heart Attack in the morning two more judges, Judge Barde and Judge Rathi came to Ravi Bhawan and then took Judge Loya to Dande Hospital.

Judge Loya was taken in conscious state to Dande Hospital, in fact, he was attending nature’s call when Judge Barde and Rathi came to Ravi Bhawan!

1.) So, it is pretty clear till here that Judge Loya was fully conscious (fact confirmed by Dande Hospital staff and doctors as well) but complained about Chest pain and burning. (Had he been assaulted or attacked would he not have told the judges or the doctors or the staff about it?)

2.) The most clinching part of it all is curiously given by Caravan Magazine itself which quotes Judge Loya’s wife saying that Judge Loya had called her in the evening of 30 November 2014 saying that he along with the other two friends was staying at Ravi Bhawan!

Questions about Hospitalization of Judge Loya

Q3.  He was taken by an Auto-Rickshaw to the Hospital

Q4.  Why was he taken to Dande Hospital, a relatively smaller hospital when a much bigger and specialized hospital Meditrina was there within 5 KM distance.

Q5.  ECG was not done on Judge Loya

Q6.  ECG did not show a heart-attack!

Q7.   Judge Loya was wearing a jeans and shirt while in Hospital

Q8.   His name was recorded as “Brijmohan H Loya” and not “Brijgopal H Loya” (which was his right name) in hospital reports.


Suspicions / Implications of these Questions


To show that once he was found unwell proper treatment was provided or was rather deliberately sabotaged (Auto, small hospital etc.)

By talking of him wearing a jeans and shirt trying to signify that Judge Loya was perhaps not brought to the hospital from Ravi Bhawan.

Two possibilities for the wrong name in Hospital report – either the patient was not Judge Loya or the persons accompanying him were not the judges who came with him (who were his friends and could not have erred with Judge Loya’s name).

Findings of the Supreme Court

 On being taken in an Auto to the hospital

1.) Absolutely no proof of Judge Loya being taken in an Auto provided!

2.) Judge Loya was taken in the car of Judge Barde who reached Ravi Bhawan along with Judge Rathi after Judge Barde was called for help by Judge Kulkarni.

These four judges had from the hospital itself called up various people- fellow judges, Judges of the high Court and also the family members of Judge Loya.

 On taking to Dande Hospital and not a Bigger Hospital

1.) This is highly subjective decision on whether to take the patient to the nearest hospital even if it’s small or take to a bigger hospital even if it’s a little far away.

2.) The decision taken in good faith by professed and acknowledged friends cannot be questioned in retrospect.

3.) On advice of a doctor friend and also of the duty doctor available at Dande Hospital, Judge Loya was taken to Meditrina Hospital

ECG Puzzle

While on one end the petitioners say that the ECG itself was not done, on the other the same ECG report is provided as proof to claim that there was “no problem with the heart” as shown in the ECG! (how can they contradict themselves?) And about heart attack, the question is answered later in the Forensics part.

The question on ECG arose because of the statement of Judge Rathi who said that the ECG was not working.

1.) In contradiction of Judge Rathi, the others clearly speak about the ECG being done and the doctor asking the patient to be taken to a bigger hospital to take proper care of the heart attack.

2.) Besides the other judges, the hospital records of both Dande Hospital and Meditrina Hospital and also the police records, recorded on the same day – all speak of the ECG copy. Hence, it would be safe to assume, for now, that ECG was done at Dande Hospital.

On Judge Loya wearing Jeans & Shirt

Judge Kulkarni says that Judge Loya was attending nature’s call when he reached Ravi Bhawan and was fully conscious even though he complained about chest pain and chest burn. Hence, the same does not seem to be of any much significance

On getting the name wrong

This is a simple error that anyone can make. (To treat this simple error to implicate that either the accompanying judge who is a close friend of Judge Loya was not present at all or that the patient to whom the report pertains is perhaps not judge Loya at all seems to fantastic, doesn’t it?)

Moreover, the Police officials noticed the error, sought a clarification from the Hospital and the same was even corrected on the day of Jude Loya’s death!

 Questions on shifting of Judge Loya’s body to his native place near Latur

Q 9.   Why was his body handed over to Dr. Rathi who was not a family member of Loyas?

Q 10.  How did an “RSS Member” Ishwar Baheti come into the picture to inform Judge Loya’s family?

Q 11. Why was Judge Loya’s family not taken to Nagpur and taken to Latur instead?

Q 12. Why did no one accompany Judge Loya’s Body to Latur?

Suspicions / Implications of these Questions

That after a ‘foul play leading to murder of Judge Loya’ his body was handed over to an unknown person!

To add to it an RSS Member got involved to inform family about his body being taken to Latur (You understand the implications and insinuations of getting in RSS into the picture, right?)

To ‘cover up the crime’ neither was Judge Loya’s body taken to Mumbai nor was his family flown to Nagpur, both were dispatched to a village around 500 km away in Latur

And in a sign of disdain or of a coverup being done, the body was sent unaccompanied!

Findings of the Supreme Court

 On Body being handed to Dr. Rathi and RSS Angle in from of Ishwar Baheti

 Dr. Rathi was attending to Judge Loya’s case on the request of Rukmesh Jakhotiya, his relative from Aurangabad and hence his body was handed over to him.

Dr. Prashant Rathi was called up by his relative à Rukmesh Jakhotiya from Aurangabad who was called up by his relative à Ishwar Baheti from Gategaon, Latur who has been a friend of Judge Loya for over 35 years and was called up by his brother à Dr. Hansraj Baheti.

Hence, Dr. Rathi was not an unknown person but a friend of the family. (Isn’t it natural for anyone to seek help of friends or friends of friends / relatives in a distant city? What do you do when your family member falls ill in some other city and no other family member is present?)

The most ‘fantastic’ piece of all the questions raised by petitioners is w.r.t this Ishwar Baheti and his ‘alleged’ RSS connection

Note carefully first that this Ishwar Baheti whose full name is Ishwar Govindlal Baheti, as per Judge Loya’s father was a “close friend of his son and was like a brother to him.”

As per Judge Loya’s son Anuj, “My uncle Ishwar Baheti, had organized a big function in the memory of my father on his first death anniversary according to panchang 6-12-2015 at Gategaon, Latur where everyone from my family, including my grandfather Harikishanji and my aunty Dr. Anuradha were present!” (Please note that caravan is alleging such a close friend and almost a family member as a conspirator in the murder of Judge Loya!)

The more ironical, funnier and fantastic part about la affaire Ishwar Baheti is that he in his own words is a “karyakarta & shubh-chintak” (worker and well-wisher) of late Vilasraoji Deshmukh (Ex Chief Minister of Maharashtra from Congress) and has no connection at all with RSS! (So, the RSS angle actually ends up turning out to be Congress angle, if at all…)

There is an RSS member in Latur with same name as Ishwar Baheti but he is “Ishwar-Prasad Bajranglal Baheti” (unknown to Loya’s and the case) and not “Ishwar Govindlal Baheti” who is involved in the case and is in fact a well-wisher of the Congress Party!

(With insinuations like this based on fantastic imagination of some, you assume SC was wrong in not ordering further enquiry? Read on for more..)

On the Loya family not being taken to Nagpur and being taken to Latur instead

This is the choice of the family and perhaps driven by the fact that Mumbai to Nagpur is around 815 Km by road whereas Mumbai to Latur is around 485 Km by road.

And moreover, it was the family which wanted a cremation in the native place of Gategaon, Latur and not anyone else!

On nobody accompanying the body to Latur

Found factually incorrect as two Magistrates, Judge Rahangdale and Judge Chopda, accompanied the body in a separate car following the ambulance all the way to Latur!

1.Questions related to the Forensic Reports

Q 13.    There was a blood mark on the collar of Judge Loya’s shirt which is not explained

Q 14.  Analysis of the forensic reports by experts approached by Caravan & Prashant   Bhushan claim that the death could not have been due to heart attack.

Q15.    Suspicions raised that Judge Loya could have been poisoned.

Suspicions / Implications of these Questions

The Blood mark to show that he was perhaps assaulted

Further reports to show that he was probably poisoned

Whatever the cause of death he surely did not die of heart attack!

Findings of the Supreme Court

 On the Blood mark on collar

1.) No Blood Marks were found at either hospitals or by the police or by the other doctors at Government Medical Hospital Nagpur, where the post mortem was held.

2.) According to Dr. Harish M Pathak, Professor and Head of Forensic Medicine & Toxicology at Seth GSMC & KEM Hospital Mumbai, the blood spot on the collar was most likely due to leakages of the cuts and stitches from the post-mortem. The leakage is quite possible especially since the body was taken by road for a distance of around 500 km.

On heart attack and possibility of Poisoning

1.) Another expert opinion of Dr. Harish Pathak was asked for, and who after gathering more information in a detailed reply, totally dismissed the conclusions presented by Caravan.

2.) The basis for claiming that there was no hear related ailment or the possibility of poisoning was the opinion presented by Prashant Bhushan and Caravan of one Dr. R K Sharma, formerly attached with AIIMS.

On being asked to clarify Dr. Sharma stated that “he has been grossly misquoted by Caravan magazine,” and that “the conclusions drawn are imaginary!”

(Now, when the basis on which one raises questions is itself being repeatedly proven as false or half-baked, then what does the Hon’ble Court or anyone else do?)

1.Questions relating to the Judicial integrity – questioning the judiciary itself

Q 16.  Testimony of four judges who were with Judge Loya not recorded in form of an affidavit

Q  17.  Opportunity to Cross Examine them not allowed

Q  18.  The four judges gave their written statements within a day of being asked. Why so much hurry?       

Q  19.   Why did Sri Kulkarni and Judge Modak meet the Loya family after a few days and not immediately?

Q  20.   The then Chief Justice of Mumbai High Court Justice Mohit Shah tried to bribe Judge Loya with 100 crore rupees.

Q 21. Why was judge UT Utpat transferred and Judge Loya brought to hear Sohrabuddin case in 2014?

Q 22.  High Court Judges gave statements in the press to pressurize the district judges to forcibly say that the death of Judge Loya was natural.

Q 23. Why did the Hon’ble judge of the Supreme Court hearing this case Justice Chandrahud and Justice Khanwilkar not recuse from the case?

Suspicions / Implications of these Questions

That the entire judiciary is compromised

Every person from judiciary, connected with the case including the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court Justice Deepak Mishra, the Judges hearing the case Justice Chandrachud and Justice Khanwilkar, the Chief Justice of Mumbai High Court Justice Mohit Shah, other judges of the Mumbai High Court who went to the Hospital in Nagpur, officials of the Mumbai High Court and all other District Judges who were contacted during the case are all corrupt!

In fact, they are not only corrupt but also co-conspirators to murder Judge Loya and protect Amit Shah!

(Is it possible that not only is the entire judiciary corrupt but also that all the doctors of all hospitals and all the police officials of two police stations that are in the picture and all forensic experts are involved – are all not only corrupt but also co-conspirators in this murder? And the only people speaking the truth in this affair are Caravan Magazine and the stellar line up of lawyers Dushyant Dave, Indira Jaisingh, Prashant Bhushan and others?)

Findings of the Supreme Court

 On not recording statements in an affidavit and not giving permission to cross examine

All statements were recorded under sign and signature of the judges and as good as affidavits. There would be no further benefit or change that can be expected from asking for an affidavit.

All material given by the state of Maharashtra and presented to the Court was made available to the petitioners and they were asked if they wanted any further information or data. The state of Maharashtra also agreed to provide any other information or data that the petitioners might want.

However, neither did the petitioners ask for any fresh data nor did they provide any from their side warranting a need to cross examine.

As the judgement put it “…absent any tittle of proof that they are co-conspirators in murder the court must stand by the statements of the judicial officers.”


On the 4 judges giving their statements within a day of being asked.


This is the call of duty of an officer and this is how they are supposed to act.


(Do you see the nefarious pattern and intent of the petitioners here? This is classic case of “Heads I win, tails you lose” scenari,o what we call “Chit bhi meri, pat bhi meri” in Hindi. If the statement is given fast then you will question “why the hurry?” and if the statement is delayed then you will question “why the delay?”)


On why the judges met Loya family after a gap of a few days


The family was away in Latur for cremation and the judges were back in Mumbai for duty.

The judges met the family at an available opportunity. There is absolutely no design or conspiracy in this.


On the Chief Justice of Mumbai HC trying to bribe Judge Loya.


Only snippets of Loya family interview provided to the Court and not the full recording.

1.)  The family of Judge Loya later disassociated themselves from the statements

2.)  Totally based on hearsay and absolutely no evidence to substantiate the same provided.

 On transfer of judge Utpat in 2014 to bring in Judge Loya

 Dushyant Dave after raising it, subsequently himself asked the court to ignore this and confine itself to the question of the death of Judge Loya.

 On the High Court Judges pressurizing the District Judges for favorable statements

It is surprising how Dushyant Dave could get it so wrong. And this has been taken as yet another example of the select advocates trying to badger the judiciary based on prevarications and innuendos.

The press statements by Mumbai High Court Judges which said that the death of Judge Loya was a natural death, were made on 27th November 2017, while the statements given by the judicial officers were recorded on the 23rd and 24th of November.

How can a statement given on 27th November influence or pressurize a statement already recorded on 23rd & 24th of November? 

(Do you see a pattern of using every strawman to claim conspiracy and raise muck and doubts in the minds of the people?)


On why Justice Chandrachud and Justice Khanwilkar did not recuse themselves from the case


The reason given by Prashant Bhushan for asking if the Judges would want to recuse from the case is that both Justice Chandrachud and Justice Khanwilkar had come from Mumbai High Court and Prashant Bhushan alleged that the Justices might know the judicial officers of Mumbai High Court in question and hence might favor them!

The hypocrisy and irony of the above is well recorded and remarked by Justice Chandrachud that “..if this (knowing Mumbai judicial officers) were to be the test, it is rather ironical that the petitioners had instituted proceedings before the Mumbai High Court each of whose judges were expected to be faced with the same situation!”


I have given all facts to the best of my abilities and do believe you will be in a position to draw your own conclusions from the above about the judgment being fair or not.

The key point also to be noted by all and laid out well in the judgment is that ordering further enquiry would have meant declaring that almost the entire judiciary, starting from the judges of the Supreme Court to the High Court to the District Court, are all not only corrupt but also co-conspirators in saving Amit Shah and in the murder of Judge Loya – and all this without a “tittle of proof” and after almost all questions raised on the death are authoritatively and conclusively answered.

Ordering further enquiry in my eyes would have opened the doors for further frivolous cases based purely on the ability of a petitioner to control a certain narrative in the media. I will conclude with a simple illustration of what the petitioners, in my view, were trying to do with this case.

Imagine a situation where for some reason you do not like an accepted truth or fact, like say “The sun rises in the east” or the more contemporary “Darwin’s theory of Evolution.”

What can you do to disprove, refute or at least subvert it? You can do what the petitioners in the Judge Loya case did.

Get some people to raise doubts on the fact without giving any counter theory or proof!

Just claim, for instance that the sun rises in the west, give some warped logic but more importantly, get it published in some news magazine or portal like the caravan of lies.

Then use your network to spread it widely and get more and more ‘respectable’ people to raise the issue.

Get media to print that there is growing doubt in the minds of the people that the sun could possibly be rising from the west and that its rising from the east is nothing but “maya” (illusion)!

Treat this narrative of doubt as proof warranting a clarification for the sake of the people.

And finally file a PIL n the Supreme Court for an “independent enquiry” in the issue.

 And If the Supreme Court sees through your game and rules against you then you can claim moral high ground by saying that “it’s a black day for India” and prepare grounds to impeach the chief Justice of India. All because you want people to believe that the sun rises from the west.


Previous «
Next »
Ashish Naredi

Entrepreneur, ISB Graduate, Associated with causes related to Education, Jack of all trades and Master of Many
  • facebook
  • twitter

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *