Statement Of Claim And Affidavit Of Ownership: Fill & Download for Free

The National Herald was a newspaper established by Jawaharlal Nehru in 1938. It is regarded to have served as Nehru's mouthpiece and that of the then Congress party in the pre-independence era. The newspaper was run by a company called Associated Journal (AJPL, also a public entity) when it was shut down in 2008. AJPL was later acquired by Young India, a company set up by Rahul Gandhi and Sonia Gandhi. The Gandhis account for 78% share in Young India.Subramanian Swamy alleged that the Gandhis have fraudulently acquired AJPL and benefitted to the tune of ~1600 Crores. The below are the key allegations on the case:- The real estate property was allocated by the Governement to National Herald for the publication and therefore cannot be used for any other purpose. After acqusition by Young India, it is claimed that the property was rented out to retail offices including the Passport centre of New Delhi. A report that also supported this claim was a statement from Rahul Gandhi- that he had no idea to relaunch the paper. Other rental offices in the building include Ministry of External affairs and Tata consultancy services. APJL also owns real estate in Lucknow, Indore among other cities- The Indian National Congress also granted an interest-free loan of Rs. 90 Crore to AJPL. The repayment of loan is also claimed to violate several Income tax laws. It is also to be noted that it is illegal for any political party to lend money for commercial purposes. The claim is that there is no rationale to the transfer of funds and this acted as the cover for siphoning funds for the party- The 90 Crore loan to AJPL shifted to Young India during transfer of ownership for a mere 50 lakh Rupees. Writing off such a huge debt also attracted fraud claims- The original shareholders of AJPL and their heirs are also alleged to have been marginalized and excluded. Aside a few lobbyists and aides of the Gandhis, none of the other people are stakeholders in Young India. The list includes many freedom fighters and ex-congressmen- In a filed statement of Young India, it is reported that a shareholder meeting was held at 10, Janpath. It is also a violation of law to hold commercial purpose meetings in a Government accommodation- In an election affidavit to declare assets owned, Rahul Gandhi has also not mentioned his 38% stake in Young India- Young India is also registered as a not-for-profit organization (section 25 status). Profiting from commercial rental income would also lead to disqualification of the statusThe timeline on the court proceedings, notices and dismissals is a separate answer in itself. Will get to it in sometime.

Thanks for asking. Very probably. A couple of questions need answers to be sure. What’s the warrant for? If the warrant is for something big, like a car or a stolen 52″ flat screen, that limits the places where the officers can look. They can’t look in your dresser drawer or your refrigerator. If it’s for anything smaller than a gun, like drugs, money, documents, or flash drives, (or guns) they can look anywhere such items could be concealed (usually including locked containers and safes).Is the weapon lawfully possessed? If so, they’ve got no reasonable cause to seize it and can’t. Not illegal (for most people) to possess a firearm in their home. But, of course, certain classes are excluded by 18 USC 922 on the federal side and state laws. People like convicted felons and drug users/dealers.We usually put language in the affidavit justifying a search for weapons and the seizure of same in drug warrants, and listed firearms in with the items to be seized on the warrant. Some cases, like white collar crimes, fraud, etc., that doesn’t work, but I found firearms in at least 40–50 percent of drug warrants, so I’d put that in the affidavit and the judges always signed off.So, assuming from your question that there is a convicted felon in the picture, the only issue now is whether that person possessed it. Ownership doesn’t enter into the picture. The law 18 USC 922 (g) prohibits convicted felons, fugitives, people under indictment, illegal aliens, drug addicts or users, and dishonorably discharged veterans from possessing, shipping, transferring, or receiving a firearm or ammunition. Note that it doesn’t say anything about ownership/owning. So, receipts or the lawful owner’s statement isn’t going to cut much. You might be able to raise a defense that you didn’t know that the gun was there and therefore didn’t possess it, but the law technically doesn’t include a knowledge or intent requirement, just possession. Same with the drug laws.Hope that helps.

Irrespective of who won politically we just have a look for what is National Harlad case.(Source News paper)The National Herald was a newspaper established by Jawaharlal Nehru in 1938. It is regarded to have served as Nehru's mouthpiece and that of the then Congress party in the pre-independence era. The newspaper was run by a company called Associated Journal (AJPL, also a public entity) when it was shut down in 2008. AJPL was later acquired by Young India, a company set up by Rahul Gandhi and Sonia Gandhi. The Gandhis account for 78% share in Young India.Subramanian Swamy alleged that the Gandhis have fraudulently acquired AJPL and benefitted to the tune of ~1600 Crores. The below are the key allegations on the case:- The real estate property was allocated by the Governement to National Herald for the publication and therefore cannot be used for any other purpose. After acqusition by Young India, it is claimed that the property was rented out to retail offices including the Passport centre of New Delhi. A report that also supported this claim was a statement from Rahul Gandhi- that he had no idea to relaunch the paper. Other rental offices in the building include Ministry of External affairs and Tata consultancy services. APJL also owns real estate in Lucknow, Indore among other cities- The Indian National Congress also granted an interest-free loan of Rs. 90 Crore to AJPL. The repayment of loan is also claimed to violate several Income tax laws. It is also to be noted that it is illegal for any political party to lend money for commercial purposes. The claim is that there is no rationale to the transfer of funds and this acted as the cover for siphoning funds for the party- The 90 Crore loan to AJPL shifted to Young India during transfer of ownership for a mere 50 lakh Rupees. Writing off such a huge debt also attracted fraud claims- The original shareholders of AJPL and their heirs are also alleged to have been marginalized and excluded. Aside a few lobbyists and aides of the Gandhis, none of the other people are stakeholders in Young India. The list includes many freedom fighters and ex-congressmen- In a filed statement of Young India, it is reported that a shareholder meeting was held at 10, Janpath. It is also a violation of law to hold commercial purpose meetings in a Government accommodation- In an election affidavit to declare assets owned, Rahul Gandhi has also not mentioned his 38% stake in Young India- Young India is also registered as a not-for-profit organization (section 25 status). Profiting from commercial rental income would also lead to disqualification of the statusThe timeline on the court proceedings, notices and dismissals is a separate answer in itself. Will get to it in sometime.During 48 years of Congress Vendetta or misuse of government agencies like CBI and Judiciary we have fixed our mindset that all the high profile cases in court are influenced by political leaders but National Harlad case is not related to any political Vendetta its just start of "Acche Din". It shows that now we cant hide truth from people.so I think national Harlad Case will be winning of all Indians, not to BJP or congress.