There can never be any bad news for powerful politicians. Supreme court has merely decided on basis of existing law. But parliament has passed amendment to law that nullifies supreme court decision. It is always politicians who have last laugh. In fact, Supreme Court judge commented that they interpreted only the law and are aware that an amendment to the law is under consideration in parliament. Parliament can always amend a law.

Then what the hell laws are for..... why supreme court is in picutre in that case.. Let parliament create the laws... total s**t system...

There can never be any bad news for powerful politicians. Supreme court has merely decided on basis of existing law. But parliament has passed amendment to law that nullifies supreme court decision. It is always politicians who have last laugh. In fact, Supreme Court judge commented that they interpreted only the law and are aware that an amendment to the law is under consideration in parliament. Parliament can always amend a law.

Then what the hell laws are for..... why supreme court is in picutre in that case.. Let parliament create the laws... total s**t system...

Supreme Court can interpret law and not make this. Supreme Court also can invalidate law if that is unconstitutional. Rightly, Parliament creates law as that have that power. But supreme Court can interpret this and decide cases according to law as made by parliament. There is division of authority between legislature (parliament), executive (Union cabinet) and judiciary (Supreme Court). Similarly in states.

There can never be any bad news for powerful politicians. Supreme court has merely decided on basis of existing law. But parliament has passed amendment to law that nullifies supreme court decision. It is always politicians who have last laugh. In fact, Supreme Court judge commented that they interpreted only the law and are aware that an amendment to the law is under consideration in parliament. Parliament can always amend a law.

Then what the hell laws are for..... why supreme court is in picutre in that case.. Let parliament create the laws... total s**t system...

Supreme Court can interpret law and not make this. Supreme Court also can invalidate law if that is unconstitutional. Rightly, Parliament creates law as that have that power. But supreme Court can interpret this and decide cases according to law as made by parliament. There is division of authority between legislature (parliament), executive (Union cabinet) and judiciary (Supreme Court). Similarly in states.

When public disappointed with legislature that what they can do?

There can never be any bad news for powerful politicians. Supreme court has merely decided on basis of existing law. But parliament has passed amendment to law that nullifies supreme court decision. It is always politicians who have last laugh. In fact, Supreme Court judge commented that they interpreted only the law and are aware that an amendment to the law is under consideration in parliament. Parliament can always amend a law.

Then what the hell laws are for..... why supreme court is in picutre in that case.. Let parliament create the laws... total s**t system...

Supreme Court can interpret law and not make this. Supreme Court also can invalidate law if that is unconstitutional. Rightly, Parliament creates law as that have that power. But supreme Court can interpret this and decide cases according to law as made by parliament. There is division of authority between legislature (parliament), executive (Union cabinet) and judiciary (Supreme Court). Similarly in states.

When public disappointed with legislature that what they can do?

The only option left for public is to break their head against a wall....do we have any say in any matter ? do we have a voice at all except during the time of election when the candidates will come in front of you to your doorsteps with folded hands , bowed heads and artificial smiles...

There can never be any bad news for powerful politicians. Supreme court has merely decided on basis of existing law. But parliament has passed amendment to law that nullifies supreme court decision. It is always politicians who have last laugh. In fact, Supreme Court judge commented that they interpreted only the law and are aware that an amendment to the law is under consideration in parliament. Parliament can always amend a law.

Then what the hell laws are for..... why supreme court is in picutre in that case.. Let parliament create the laws... total s**t system...

Supreme Court can interpret law and not make this. Supreme Court also can invalidate law if that is unconstitutional. Rightly, Parliament creates law as that have that power. But supreme Court can interpret this and decide cases according to law as made by parliament. There is division of authority between legislature (parliament), executive (Union cabinet) and judiciary (Supreme Court). Similarly in states.

When public disappointed with legislature that what they can do?

The only option left for public is to break their head against a wall....do we have any say in any matter ? do we have a voice at all except during the time of election when the candidates will come in front of you to your doorsteps with folded hands , bowed heads and artificial smiles...

If you were able to read their mind, you would read absolutely opposite in their minds what their faces reflect during election period. They look at voter as a future BAKRA, waiting to come under their knife ready to eat RAW. Voter is their chicken and mutton.

There can never be any bad news for powerful politicians. Supreme court has merely decided on basis of existing law. But parliament has passed amendment to law that nullifies supreme court decision. It is always politicians who have last laugh. In fact, Supreme Court judge commented that they interpreted only the law and are aware that an amendment to the law is under consideration in parliament. Parliament can always amend a law.

Then what the hell laws are for..... why supreme court is in picutre in that case.. Let parliament create the laws... total s**t system...

Supreme Court can interpret law and not make this. Supreme Court also can invalidate law if that is unconstitutional. Rightly, Parliament creates law as that have that power. But supreme Court can interpret this and decide cases according to law as made by parliament. There is division of authority between legislature (parliament), executive (Union cabinet) and judiciary (Supreme Court). Similarly in states.

When public disappointed with legislature that what they can do?

The only option left for public is to break their head against a wall....do we have any say in any matter ? do we have a voice at all except during the time of election when the candidates will come in front of you to your doorsteps with folded hands , bowed heads and artificial smiles...

If you were able to read their mind, you would read absolutely opposite in their minds what their faces reflect during election period. They look at voter as a future BAKRA, waiting to come under their knife ready to eat RAW. Voter is their chicken and mutton.

There can never be any bad news for powerful politicians. Supreme court has merely decided on basis of existing law. But parliament has passed amendment to law that nullifies supreme court decision. It is always politicians who have last laugh. In fact, Supreme Court judge commented that they interpreted only the law and are aware that an amendment to the law is under consideration in parliament. Parliament can always amend a law.

Then what the hell laws are for..... why supreme court is in picutre in that case.. Let parliament create the laws... total s**t system...

Supreme Court can interpret law and not make this. Supreme Court also can invalidate law if that is unconstitutional. Rightly, Parliament creates law as that have that power. But supreme Court can interpret this and decide cases according to law as made by parliament. There is division of authority between legislature (parliament), executive (Union cabinet) and judiciary (Supreme Court). Similarly in states.

When public disappointed with legislature that what they can do?

The only option left for public is to break their head against a wall....do we have any say in any matter ? do we have a voice at all except during the time of election when the candidates will come in front of you to your doorsteps with folded hands , bowed heads and artificial smiles...

If you were able to read their mind, you would read absolutely opposite in their minds what their faces reflect during election period. They look at voter as a future BAKRA, waiting to come under their knife ready to eat RAW. Voter is their chicken and mutton.

Yes voter know that they are Bakra and chicken but they have any other option than went under their knife. Whether knife fall on apple or apple fall on knife, only apple will be sacrificed.

According to Supreme court , any lawmaker convicted from now for an offence punishable with a sentence of two years or more will be immediately unseated, and will be barred from contesting elections for at least six years.

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/From-now-lawmakers-who-get-two-years-in-jail-will-lose-seats/articleshow/22379224.cms

There can never be any bad news for powerful politicians. Supreme court has merely decided on basis of existing law. But parliament has passed amendment to law that nullifies supreme court decision. It is always politicians who have last laugh. In fact, Supreme Court judge commented that they interpreted only the law and are aware that an amendment to the law is under consideration in parliament. Parliament can always amend a law.

Then what the hell laws are for..... why supreme court is in picutre in that case.. Let parliament create the laws... total s**t system...

Supreme Court can interpret law and not make this. Supreme Court also can invalidate law if that is unconstitutional. Rightly, Parliament creates law as that have that power. But supreme Court can interpret this and decide cases according to law as made by parliament. There is division of authority between legislature (parliament), executive (Union cabinet) and judiciary (Supreme Court). Similarly in states.

When public disappointed with legislature that what they can do?

The only option left for public is to break their head against a wall....do we have any say in any matter ? do we have a voice at all except during the time of election when the candidates will come in front of you to your doorsteps with folded hands , bowed heads and artificial smiles...

If you were able to read their mind, you would read absolutely opposite in their minds what their faces reflect during election period. They look at voter as a future BAKRA, waiting to come under their knife ready to eat RAW. Voter is their chicken and mutton.

Yes voter know that they are Bakra and chicken but they have any other option than went under their knife. Whether knife fall on apple or apple fall on knife, only apple will be sacrificed.

Its high time we the Bakras should come of age and become lions. And prove that people power can shake the foundations of the fragile structures built by Netas.
Recent agitation of APNGOS against the bifurcation of the state has become a huge success that shook the capital New Delhi. The highlight of the agitation is the entire movement was led by ordinary people. They did not allow any politician come near them.

There can never be any bad news for powerful politicians. Supreme court has merely decided on basis of existing law. But parliament has passed amendment to law that nullifies supreme court decision. It is always politicians who have last laugh. In fact, Supreme Court judge commented that they interpreted only the law and are aware that an amendment to the law is under consideration in parliament. Parliament can always amend a law.

Then what the hell laws are for..... why supreme court is in picutre in that case.. Let parliament create the laws... total s**t system...

Supreme Court can interpret law and not make this. Supreme Court also can invalidate law if that is unconstitutional. Rightly, Parliament creates law as that have that power. But supreme Court can interpret this and decide cases according to law as made by parliament. There is division of authority between legislature (parliament), executive (Union cabinet) and judiciary (Supreme Court). Similarly in states.

When public disappointed with legislature that what they can do?

The only option left for public is to break their head against a wall....do we have any say in any matter ? do we have a voice at all except during the time of election when the candidates will come in front of you to your doorsteps with folded hands , bowed heads and artificial smiles...

If you were able to read their mind, you would read absolutely opposite in their minds what their faces reflect during election period. They look at voter as a future BAKRA, waiting to come under their knife ready to eat RAW. Voter is their chicken and mutton.

Yes voter know that they are Bakra and chicken but they have any other option than went under their knife. Whether knife fall on apple or apple fall on knife, only apple will be sacrificed.

Its high time we the Bakras should come of age and become lions. And prove that people power can shake the foundations of the fragile structures built by Netas.
Recent agitation of APNGOS against the bifurcation of the state has become a huge success that shook the capital New Delhi. The highlight of the agitation is the entire movement was led by ordinary people. They did not allow any politician come near them.

Many time peoples show mirror to politicians. They were always select best one from their point of view but later all will proved cheater and frauds. Indian politics in heaven for criminals. Here solo condition of selecting candidates by the parties is"who can win". I think Asha Ram should be make a new party or join any existing party.