IN THE SUPREME COURT OF
INDIA
ORIGINAL CIVIL
JURISDICTION
I.A. NO. 62789 OF 2019
IN
WRIT PETITION CIVIL NO. 13 OF 2018
(UNDER ARTICLE 32 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA)
IN THE
MATTER OF
Seema
Sapra … Petitioner
Versus
Union
of India & Ors. … Respondents
URGENT
APPLICATION OF PETITIONER SEEKING RECALL/ MODIFICATION OF ORDER DATED 11 APRIL
2019 PASSED IN CRIMINAL APPEAL DIARY NO 10342/2016, WRIT PETITION CIVIL 13/2018
AND WRIT PETITION CIVIL 1027/2018
To,
Hon’ble
The Chief Justice of India and
his
companion justices of the Supreme Court of India
Most
respectfully showeth:
1. This petitioner has filed the accompanying writ petition under
Article 32 of the Constitution of India.
2. On 11 April 2019, the following order was passed in three cases of
the Petitioner pending before the Hon’ble Supreme Court. The order was common
to all three cases.
|
ITEM NO.3 COURT NO.9 SECTION II-C
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Criminal Appeal D.No. 10342/2016
SEEMA SAPRA Appellant(s)
VERSUS
COURT ON ITS OWN MOTION Respondent(s)
112422/2018
(Applications for summoning original record, seeking directions
for
hearing by a Five Judge Constitution Bench, appropriate
orders/directions, condonation of delay in filing appeal,
recalling
the court’s order dated 07.02.2018 and place on record documents
from Delhi High Court)
WITH
W.P.(C) No. 13/2018 (X)
(IA No.4015/2018-Permission to appear and argue in-person
IA 61232/2019-Application for appropriate orders/directions)
W.P.(C) No. 001027 / 2018 (X)
(FOR ADMISSION and IA No.122904/2018-PERMISSION TO APPEAR AND
ARGUE
IN PERSON)
Date : 11-04-2019 These matters were called on for hearing
today.
CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.M. KHANWILKAR
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY RASTOGI
For Appellant(s) Ms. Seema Sapra
In-person
For Respondent(s) Mr. Annam D. N. Rao, AOR
Mr. Amber Sachdeva, Adv.
Mr. A. Venkatesh, Adv.
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
We have heard the petitioner in-person.
She is at liberty to file additional documents, which were
referred to during the course of argument or any further document(s) which
she
intends to file.
She prays for four weeks’ time to do so.
Appropriate order will be passed after the additional
document(s) are filed.
After hearing the petitioner in-person for almost two hours and
this order being dictated, the petitioner submits that this Bench should not
hear these matters.
Even this submission will be considered in the order that we may
pass after considering the document(s).
Orders reserved.
(NEETU KHAJURIA)
COURT MASTER
(VIDYA NEGI)
COURT MASTER
|
3. The present application is being filed seeking recall/
modification of this order dated 11 April 2019. This application may be treated
as having been filed in all three matters, i.e., in Criminal Appeal Diary No.
10342/2016, in Writ Petition Civil No. 13/2018 and in Writ Petition Civil No.
1027/2018.
4. This application for recall/ modification of order dated 11 April
2019 is being filed because the said order (i) incorrectly records certain
material particulars; (ii) endangers the life of the Petitioner; (iii) will
result in a miscarriage of justice.
5. This order mis-records that the Petitioner-in-Person has addressed
the court on the merits of these three matters. The fact is that she has still not
been heard on the merits either on the law or on the fact in any of the three
cases. She has also not been heard on IA Nos 122625/2017,
123144/2017, 112422/2018, 127773/2017 in Criminal Appeal Diary No. 10342/2016.
It is submitted that an important pending application in this matter being IA
112422/2018 producing the fabricated, forged and fraudulent authority documents
filed by Zia Mody’s firm on behalf of General Electric Company before the Delhi
High Court in Writ Petition Civil No. 1280/2012 is required to be heard in open
court. IA No. 122625/2017 seeking summoning of the Delhi High Court record has
not been heard. IA No. 123144/2017 seeking reference of the hearing of Criminal
Appeal Diary No. 10342/2016 to a five Judge Bench has also been heard.
6. On 11 April 2019, the Petitioner sought protection orders from the
court on her application being IA No. 61232/2019. The Petitioner stated that
she was being poisoned and that tests done at AIIMS to investigate her
complaint of poisoning will confirm this. The Petitioner also stated that the
full details of her being poisoned and targeted both in the past and presently
needed to be placed on the record of the Hon’ble Court. The Petitioner stated
that all relevant documents were not on record including medical documents
establishing poisoning (and its cover-up) filed before the Delhi High Court on
Writ Petition Civil 1280/2012. The Petitioner requested the Court to summon the
Delhi High Court record in Writ Petition Civil 1280/2012. She informed the Court
that she was begging for money to live and was homeless. The Petitioner
described how her ankle had been deliberately dislocated in June 2014 and the
documents establishing this were on record in Delhi High Court Writ Petition
Civil 1280/2012. She referred to and
read out a few paragraphs from CM 5008/2013 in Delhi High Court Writ Petition
Civil 1280/2012 which described the medical evidence of her complaints of
poisoning in 2011 and 2012.
7. Instead of directing that the petitioner be protected and instead
of directing that an FIR ne registered for poisoning and that the Petitioner be
tested for poisoning at AIIMS, Justice Khanwilkar interrupted the Petitioner
and told her that she should file these documents and that orders would be
passed by the Court without hearing her. Hence this order has been passed.
8. The order also does not record that at the very outset of the
hearing, the Petitioner had requested that Justice Khanwilkar not hear these
matters because of his personal connections to and friendships with Soli
Sorabjee and Raian Karanjawala, against whom the Petitioner has complained of
sexual harassment and sexual assault. Justice Khanwilkar practiced as an AOR in
the Supreme Court for 18 years. He was counsel for the State of Maharashtra.
Justice Khanwilkar would have had and continues to have personal friendships
with both Mr Soli Sorabjee and Mr Raian Karanjawala. Mr Soli Sorabjee was
Attorney General of India when Justice Khanwilkar was appointed a Judge. It is
extremely likely that Mr Soli Sorabjee was consulted by the Supreme Court and/or
Bombay High Court Collegiums when Justice Khanwilkar’s name was being
considered for a judicial position. Justice Khanwilkar was perhaps connected to
the Enron-Dabhol litigation as counsel, where General Electric Company was
again involved in corruption. Justice Khanwilkar attended the wedding functions
of Mr Raian Karanjawala’s daughters. Justice Khanwilkar would also have and
continue to have a personal friendship with Ms Zia Mody. The Petitioner has
accused Ms Zia Mody of fraud in IA 112422/2018 before the Supreme Court. For
all of these reasons, Justice Khanwilkar should not hear, decide or pass orders
in the matters of the Petitioner. At the very outset of the hearing, the
Petitioner requested that Justice Khanwilkar not hear these cases. The Bench
attempted to reassure the Petitioner and pressured her to continue. As set out in
this application, the Petitioner’s apprehensions about Justice Khanwilkar hearing
her cases turned out to be right.
9. The order also does not record that during the hearing on 11 April
2019, the Petitioner made submissions limited to two points. First, that the Court
pass interim orders granting her protection on her IA 61232/2019 in Writ
Petition Civil 13/2018). And second that the Delhi High Court record in Writ
Petition Civil No. 1280/2012 be summoned. In the midst of submissions limited
to these two issues, Justice Khanwilkar suddenly announced that the Court was
reserving orders in all three cases.
10. The Petitioner then stated that she had not been heard and commenced
reading extracts from IA 5008/2013 filed before the Delhi High Court in Writ
Petition Civil No. 1280/2012 (Seema Sapra versus General Electric Company &
others). This application contains complaints and evidence that in 2011 and
2012, the Petitioner was being poisoned. After the Petitioner read out a few
paragraphs of this 50-page application, Justice Khanwilkar suddenly stopped the
Petitioner and asked her to file it instead. She was then not allowed to speak further, and
the order was passed. The Court also refused the Petitioner’s request that a
next date of hearing be indicated in the matters.
11. The Petitioner told the Court that she was being poisoned and that
a medical examination of the Petitioner would confirm this.
12. The Petitioner stated that she was homeless, had nowhere to live
and was literally begging for money.
13. The order endangers the Petitioner’s life by ignoring her
statement that she is being poisoned and that a medical test at AIIMS can
confirm this poisoning. IA 61232/2019 has also been ignored in this order. As a
direct result of this order dated 11 April 2019, the Petitioner has been
poisoned further since yesterday with acidic chemical fumes, nerve agents and
poisonous inhalants. This can be confirmed by a medical examination. The
open-ended adjournment of these matters without even a next date of hearing or
an indication of whether the cases will be listed for hearing leaves the
petitioner open to further attempts on her life. This places the life of the
Petitioner in great danger. Why has this Hon’ble Court failed to protect the
Petitioner?
14. A petitioner providing evidence that she is a whistleblower
against corruption by General Electric Company and that she has made sexual
harassment complaints against Soli Sorabjee and Raian Karanjawala and providing
evidence that she had been poisoned in the past told this Bench on 11 April
2019 that she was being poisoned and the Bench has simply ignored this and has
neither directed AIIMS to medically examine the Petitioner and nor directed the
Police and the Union of India to protect the Petitioner.
15. It is submitted that the order dated 11 April 2019 itself records:
“She is at liberty to file additional documents, which were referred to during
the course of argument or any further document(s) which she intends to file.”
This shows that documents being relied upon by the Petitioner are not on
record. It is submitted that the Petitioner has the right to bring these
documents on record and to address the Court on these documents. Being homeless
and begging for money, the Petitioner has prayed that the Hon’ble Court summon
the Delhi High Court record where a number of the documents are filed. Should
the Court not do this? Should the Petitioner being poisoned be forced to beg
for money to print, photocopy and file these documents? Is the Petitioner not
entitled to a hearing in open court on these documents establishing that she
had been poisoned, her ankle had been dislocated and that her corruption
complaints against General Electric Company were covered up?
16. The order dated 11 April 2019 also reads: “Appropriate order will
be passed after the additional document(s) are filed.” It is unclear as to what
kind of order will be passed on these documents without hearing the Petitioner.
Surely the Petitioner has the right to address the Court on medical documents
establishing that she was poisoned? She has a right to be heard on these
documents and a right to have these documents on record before the Hon’ble
Court during such hearing.
17. This Application is being made in the interest of justice.
18. The Petitioner is filing a separate writ petitioner seeking the
registration of an FIR on her complaints of poisoning and seeking medical
investigation and medical treatment for poisoning at AIIMS.
In
view of the abovementioned facts it is respectfully submitted that this
Hon’ble
Court may be pleased to:
PRAYERS
a)
Recall/
modify its order dated 11 April 2019 in Criminal Appeal Diary No. 10342/2016,
in Writ Petition Civil No. 13/2018 and in Writ Petition Civil No. 1027/2018 and
list these cases for hearing
the Petitioner in open court on the medical evidence establishing that she was
poisoned, that her ankle was deliberately dislocated, that her whistle-blower
complaints of corruption against General Electric Company have been covered up
and that Writ Petition Civil No. 1280/2012 before the Delhi High Court was
subverted by fraud on the court as described in IA 112422/2018 and by the
filing of false affidavits and fabricated documents by the Railway Ministry;
b)
Recall/ modify
its order dated 11 April 2019 in Criminal Appeal Diary No. 10342/2016, in Writ
Petition Civil No. 13/2018 and in Writ Petition Civil No. 1027/2018 and summon the record of the Delhi High Court in Writ Petition
Civil No. 1280/2012 and allow the Petitioner to make submissions on these documents
establishing both her corruption complaints against General Electric Company
and her complaints of poisoning and targeting;
c)
Recall/
modify its order dated 11 April 2019 in Criminal Appeal Diary No. 10342/2016,
in Writ Petition Civil No. 13/2018 and in Writ Petition Civil No. 1027/2018 and
direct that these cases be listed before a Bench not comprising Justice
Khanwilkar;
d)
Recall/
modify its order dated 11 April 2019 in Criminal Appeal Diary No. 10342/2016,
in Writ Petition Civil No. 13/2018 and in Writ Petition Civil No. 1027/2018 and
list all three cases for hearing and permit the Petitioner to make her oral
submissions in open court on the merits of these three cases separately on law
and facts as this hearing has not taken place;
e)
Direct the
Government of India through the Ministry of Home Affairs and direct the Delhi
Police through the Commissioner of Police to provide immediate protection to
the Petitioner to prevent her being poisoned further or being targeted in any
manner as the life of the Petitioner must be protected and a situation where
the Petitioner is eliminated or incapacitated cannot be allowed to develop;
f)
Direct that
the Petitioner be protected so that she is able to file affidavits and
documents bringing further relevant facts on record including her complaints of
poisoning after 2015 March and then list these cases for hearing the Petitioner
on these documents in open court;
g)
pass any
other or further orders, as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper.
FILED BY:
PETITIONER-IN-PERSON
DRAWN:
12 April 2019
FILED
ON: 12 April 2019
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
I.A. NO. OF
2019
IN
WRIT PETITION CIVIL NO. 13 OF 2018
(UNDER ARTICLE 32 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA)
IN THE
MATTER OF
Seema
Sapra … Petitioner
Versus
Union
of India & Ors. … Respondents
AFFIDAVIT
I,
Seema Sapra, aged 47 years, D/o Late A. R. Sapra, presently homeless in New
Delhi, do hereby solemnly state and affirm as under:
1.
That I am the Petitioner and am familiar with the facts and circumstances of
the case and am competent and authorized to swear this Affidavit.
2.
That I have drafted, read and understood the accompanying Application for Recall/ modification of order
dated 11 April 2019 in Criminal Appeal Diary No. 10342/2016, in Writ Petition
Civil No. 13/2018 and in Writ Petition Civil No. 1027/2018 and I state that the contents of the
application are based on my personal knowledge and on other sources which I
believe to be true and correct.
DEPONENT
VERIFICATION:
I, the
above-named Deponent, do hereby verify that the contents of the above Affidavit
are true and correct to my knowledge, no part of it is false and nothing
material has been concealed there from.
Verified
at New Delhi on this 12th day of April 2019.
DEPONENT
No comments:
Post a Comment