The letter representation reproduced below has been submitted by me to the Chief Justice of the Delhi High Court on 10 January 2014 and a copy has been filed in Writ Petition (Civil) 1280/ 2012 in the Delhi High Court on 10 January 2014
seema.sapra@gmail.com
10
January 2014
To
(i)
Chief Justice of India ,
Supreme Court of India
(ii)
Chief Justice Ramana, Delhi High Court
(iii)
The Registrar General,
Delhi High
Court
(iv)
Chairman, Bar Council
of Delhi
(v)
All other members of
Bar Council of Delhi
(vi)
Delhi Police Commissioner
(vii)
Registrar Vigilance, Delhi High Court
To the Bar Council of Delhi, to
the Chief Justice of India, to the Chief Justice of the Delhi High Court, to
the Registrar General of the Delhi High Court, to the Police Commissioner for
Delhi, and to All Others,
Ref: Whistle-blower corruption and
right to life Writ Petition pending in the Delhi High Court since February 2012
– Writ Petition (Civil) 1280/ 2012 – in the matter of Seema Sapra versus
General Electric Company & Others AND
complaint against Justice P K Bhasin and Justice Siddharth Mridul AND a request that this matter be
referred to the Supreme Court of India for hearing AND the request that this matter be posted another bench not
comprising of Justice P K Bhasin and Justice Siddharth Mridul until the matter
can be transferred for hearing to the Supreme Court of India
I am an advocate enrolled with the
Bar Council of Delhi since 1995.
I have filed the captioned
corruption petition producing complaints and evidence of corruption, fraud,
forgery, bribery and other illegal practices committed by General Electric
Company, its subsidiaries, its employees and agents in connection with two
Railway Ministry tenders for Projects to set up diesel and electric locomotive
factories at Marhowra and Madhepura respectively. These two Projects with long
term purchase and service contracts are together worth over Rs 127,000 crores
to the selected bidder. Not only are these Projects against the national and
public interest but as described by me in the writ petition these tenders are
tainted with corruption, illegal lobbying, fraud, forgery, and bribery with
high level Government of India functionaries including Montek Singh Ahluwalia
conspiring with General Electric to create and award these lucrative tenders to
General Electric.
I worked with General Electric
briefly in 2010 and discovered shortly afterwards that General Electric
employees were seeking to use me as a scapegoat and use the pretext of my legal
services as a device to cover up and carry out their illegal activities in
connection with these Projects and tenders. I learnt that my contract with
General Electric was tainted by fraud and that the contract was against public
interest and public policy in that its intent was to facilitate violation of both
Indian and United States
law and also General Electric Company’s own internal compliance policies.
I was subjected to incessant and
intense harassment during my time at General Electric as part of this
conspiracy to misuse and abuse my legal services. I was even drugged during my
time at General Electric with intent to prevent me from finding out what
exactly was going on and from exposing corruption.
Under Indian and United States law
as well as under General Electric’s compliance policies (all of which I was
mandated by law as well as my employment contract to adhere to), upon learning
of these corrupt and illegal activities and because of the inexplicable
harassment, I first made internal complaints to General Electric Company’s
compliance department and to General Electric Company’s General Counsel Mr
Brackett Denniston. Attempts were made to cover up my complaints and I was
drugged. My contract was abruptly and unlawfully terminated when I began to
raise questions about a cover-up.
After my contract was terminated
and I made clear my intention to approach legal authorities both in India and in the United States , General Electric
attempted another cover-up by carrying out an alleged internal investigation.
This was also used to cover-up my complaints and I continued to be drugged and
poisoned.
Finally fearing for my life and
with intent to protect myself, I sent my complaints to the authorities and also
made my complaints public by forwarding them to lawyers, embassies, human
rights organizations and to the domestic and international press. This also did
not result in affording me protection.
I mentioned the complaints and the
threat to my life before the Chief Justice of India in July 2011 and before the
then Acting Chief Justice of the Delhi High Court in February 2012.
Finally, I filed the captioned writ
petition in February 2012 seeking interalia disqualification and blacklisting
of General Electric, action on my complaints in accordance with law,
investigation and prosecution of the corruption complaints, and seeking
protection, safe housing and enforcement of my right to life.
This writ petition and my interim
applications have remained unheard since February 2012.
I have made several complaints and
representations to the Bar Council of Delhi regarding this matter but I have
not received any response.
The PMO, the Delhi Police, the CBI,
the CVC, the Railway Ministry, General Electric Company, GE India Industrial
Private Limited, GE Global Sourcing India Private Limited, Bombardier, Siemens,
EMD (a US
company and a subsidiary of Caterpillar), Alstom, and BHEL have all been issued
notice in the captioned matter.
The Bar Council of Delhi was also
issued notice in the captioned matter in April 2013.
It is important for me to point out
that I have acted in compliance with Bar Council of India’s ethics rules for
lawyers that provide that an advocate will not permit her legal services to be
used to facilitate criminal acts. Under Bar Council of India ethics rules, the
Indian Penal Code, and the Indian Evidence Act, I was required to make these
public complaints against General Electric and to produce the evidence in my
possession in support of these complaints.
There is no confidentiality in
evidence in criminal complaints of corruption, fraud, forgery, bribery and
illegal lobbying and I have produced this evidence (including what I witnessed
and heard during my time at General Electric and some internal General Electric
documents evidencing these criminal acts) on the court record (and therefore in
the public domain) in Writ Petition Civil 1280/ 2012.
I, the petitioner-in-person,
have been sleeping in my car since 27 February 2013 without my applications for
housing and protection being heard.
This is a corruption matter
involving General Electric, Montek Ahluwalia and Rs 127,000 crores worth
Railway tenders – Projects to set up Marhowra diesel loco factory and Madhepura
electric loco factory.
Justice A K Sikri, Justice
Endlaw & Chandhiok participated in the conspiracy and attempt to murder me
before this writ petition was filed, when I mentioned the threat to my life and
sought protection on 17 Feb 2012 - subject of CM 428/ 2013 in Writ Petition
Civil 1280/ 2012 lying unheard.
Thanks to the following judges
and lawyers who have/ are facilitating this, I have been and continue to be
poisoned: A K Sikri, Gita Mittal,
Shakder, P K Bhasin, Nanju Ganpathy, Zia Mody, Rajiv Nayar, A Sundaram, Najmi
Waziri, Chandhiok, Rajiv Mehra, Dayan Krishnan, P K Sharma, Siddharth Mridul, Arvind
Nigam, etc., etc..
I am sleeping in my car parked
in Rabindra Nagar. Delhi High Court orders in WP Civil 1280/ 2012 direct the
police to protect my life and property. The Police has failed to provide me
with any security/ protection. CP Bassi must comply with the courts directions
and provide me with Z+ security. The threat to my life issues from General Electric,
Montek Ahluwalia and A S Chandhiok because of my whistleblower complaints in WP
Civil 1280/ 2012. The threat also emanates from Soli Sorabjee and Raian
Karanjawala because of complaints made by me against them for sexual
harassment.
My car is parked close to the
gate of D 47, residence of Special CP Dharmendra Kumar. Delhi
The threat also emanates from
Supreme Court Judge A K Sikri, Delhi High Court Judges Gita Mittal and P K
Bhasin, Analjit Singh, Max Healthcare etc who participated in past conspiracies
and attempts to murder me - Complaints and evidence are on the court record
A S
Chandhiok has been party to the conspiracy and several attempts to
eliminate me since 2010 when I made corruption complaints against General
Electric. A US S Chandhiok is
helping General Electric and Gibson Dunn & Crutcher eliminate me and has dealings
with this firm. Gibson Dunn & Crutcher lawyers would also face prosecution
if the US
A S Chandhiok
is also using his influence in the Delhi High Court to make it difficult for me
to survive by influencing lawyers to participate in targeting me and in pressurizing
others against coming to my assistance. I will be naming and producing evidence
against those lawyers who have been participating in targeting me.
I have uploaded the entire court
record (which is in the public domain) on the internet at my blog seema.sapra.blogspot.in.
My lungs have already been
destroyed and are in worse condition than those of a Bhopal
I am now being poisoned and am
being deliberately exposed to toxic chemicals and fumes including while I am
asleep in my car at night, on Delhi High Court premises, and in public places
that I frequent.
With my lungs having been damaged,
any exposure to toxic chemicals or fumes/ smoke irritates and inflames my
respiratory passages and airways, causing coughing and accumulation of fluid in
my airways. This repetitive assault on my lungs results in further damage to my
airways.
This matter is presently before a
Special Bench comprising of Justice P K Bhasin and Justice Siddharth Mridul.
I request that Writ Petition Civil
1280/ 2012 be sent to the Chief Justice of India with a request that this
matter be heard by the Supreme Court of India. In the alternative I request
that this matter be placed before a Division Bench not comprising of Justice P
K Bhasin and Justice Siddharth Mridul until this matter can be transferred to
the Supreme Court of India.
The reasons and grounds for the
abovementioned requests are the following:
(i) CM 428/ 2013 filed by me and pending hearing in
W.P. Civil 1280/ 2012 seeks an investigation into the conspiracy and attempt to
murder me after I mentioned to then Acting Chief Justice of the Delhi High
Court (Justice A K Sikri) on 17 February 2012 in open court in court room no. 1
that my life was in danger, that I had been poisoned, that my lungs had been
poisoned and that unless the court stepped in to protect me, I would be found
dead. I mentioned before Justice A K Sikri that I had made corruption and
forgery complaints against General Electric Company. I had informed J. A K
Sikri and J. Rajiv Sahai Endlaw I wanted to file a writ petition in court in
connection with these complaints and to obtain protection. I had not filed this
writ petition at that time. Instead of issuing directions to the police to
protect me and instead of recording in a written order that I had informed the
Acting Chief Justice of the Delhi High Court in open court that I had been
poisoned and instead of sending me to a government hospital like AIIMS with a
written direction that I be medically examined and treated for my complaint of
poisoning, Justice A K Sikri acting in collusion with Justice Rajiv Sahai
Endlaw (who was sitting with him in court 1) and acting in collusion with Mr A
S Chandhiok who was present in court 1 on that date, participated in a
conspiracy and attempt to murder/ eliminate me with intent to prevent me from
instituting court proceedings on my corruption complaints against General
Electric. As part of this conspiracy Justice A K Sikri, Justice Rajiv Sahai
Endlaw and A S Chandhiok jointly sent me to the Delhi High Court dispensary for
what Justice A K Sikri described in court as “urgent medical attention”. The
Chief Medical Officer of the Delhi High Court dispensary (one Dr K G S Bansal) then
falsified my medical symptoms and records by falsifying my blood pressure
reading and depicting it as 180/ 100. He prescribed anti-blood pressure
medication that I did not need. He prescribed a sleeping pill at night (Alprax)
which I did not need. I point out that I had told Justice A K Sikri and Justice
Rajiv Sahai Endlaw on 17 February 2012 that my lungs had been poisoned and that
I was experiencing night-time breathlessness and breathlessness upon exertion. In
these circumstances taking a sleeping pill at night could have caused my death.
I point out that the prescription for Alprax (which would have kept me sleepy
and disoriented) was also intended to prevent me from being able to draft and file
the writ petition against General Electric. I also point out that the
prescription of Dr K G S Bansal is completely unjustifiable and indefensible.
First a determination of hypertension and a prescription of a calcium channel
blocker cannot be made on a single blood pressure reading. Medical practice
requires that before a determination of elevated blood pressure is made, at
least three separate blood pressure measurements be taken. Second, I had
complained of poisoning. Assuming that the CMO of the Delhi High Court
dispensary found that my blood pressure was 180/ 100 after I had made a
complaint of poisoning; the only proper course for the CMO would have then been
to immediately advise that I go to a hospital emergency unit for evaluation and
treatment for poisoning. Elevated high blood pressure of 180/ 100 would
constitute an important red flag in a patient complaining of poisoning. It would
also constitute a medical emergency placing the patient at immediate risk of
stroke or death. In such case the patient should have been immediately referred
to a hospital emergency unit where the blood pressure could have been brought
down. Instead, Dr K G S Bansal was sending me home (I was living alone) with a
prescription that would have been useless in a situation of a hypertensive
crisis (blood pressure 180/ 100) and which prescription instead was harmful to
me and would have caused my death. I am certain that Dr K G S Bansal falsified
my blood pressure reading that day to create a false record of a hypertensive
crisis which as part of the criminal conspiracy to eliminate me would later have
been used to explain away my murder by subsequent poisoning. I suspected that
Dr K G S Bansal had falsified my blood pressure and realised that he was
attempting to cover up my complaint of poisoning after he attempted to
prescribe me Alprax. Therefore I refused his advice and after informing Justice
A K Sikri of this, I went to a private medical facility later that day and got
my blood pressure checked. The blood pressure was within normal range (136/90). I got my blood pressure checked again twice
the next day and again in the following days and my blood pressure was within
normal range. It is not medically possible for a blood pressure reading of 180/
100 to come down to a reading of 136/ 90 on its own without medication in a
period of about 2 hours. Also, Dr K G S Bansal misled me and told me that my
blood pressure was elevated because of anxiety. A blood pressure reading of
180/ 100 cannot be attributed to anxiety. A chest x-ray taken three days later (20
February 2012) confirmed my complaint of lung poisoning and the radiologist
reported left supra hilar opacity in the lungs. An ECG taken on 22 February
2012 showed further signs of poisoning
with sinus tachycardia and a pulse of 118. Both these tests confirm that I was
being poisoned at that time. I point out again that it would be dangerous for a
person with a lung deficiency and experiencing night time breathlessness to
take a sleeping pill or a pill like Alprax at night. I had informed Dr K G S
Bansal both of my complaint of lung poisoning, of cough with mucus, of
breathlessness and of night-time breathlessness. Yet he proceeded to advise me
to take Alprax at night. Taking Alprax at night would have been fatal for
someone in my condition. There were other events that weekend (recorded in CM
428/ 2013) which confirm that a conspiracy and attempt to murder/ eliminate me
was put into effect when I mentioned the threat to my life before Justice A K
Sikri on 17 February 2012 in open court and when I mentioned that I intended to
file a writ petition against General Electric Company on my corruption
complaints. Justice A K Sikri and Mr A S Chandhiok participated in this
criminal conspiracy and enabled this attempt to murder me by sending me to the
CMO of the Delhi High Court dispensary who covered up my complaint of
poisoning, who prescribed harmful medication, and who created a false medical
record of a hypertensive emergency with intent that this false medical record
could be used to explain my death or a stroke/ coma or other significant health
event brought on by poisoning. These facts are part of CM 428/ 2012 where I
have stated as follows:
“The
present application seeks to place before this court the facts and
circumstances regarding one of several attempts to eliminate the petitioner.
The conspiracy and attempt to murder the petitioner that is the subject matter
of this application took place on February 17, 2012 and in the weekend and days
immediately following. The conspiracy and attempt to murder the petitioner on
February 17, 2012 is significant because it took place immediately before the
petitioner filed this writ petition in court and because it took place at a
time when the petitioner’s imminent intent to file the present petition was
publicly known. The conspiracy and attempt to murder the petitioner on February
17, 2012 is also significant because the high offices of the Chief Justice of
the Delhi High Court and the Additional Solicitor General (ASG) of the
Government of India and the office of the president of the Bar Association for
the High Court of Delhi were sought to be used in a brazen conspiracy and
attempt to murder the petitioner before her petition could be filed in court. The
conspiracy and attempt to murder the petitioner on February 17, 2012 is also
significant because it establishes that the threat/ danger to the life of the
petitioner on account of exposing General Electric corruption, fraud, forgery
and bribery in high-value Railway Ministry tenders involve powerful and
influential lawyers with access within the judiciary itself.”
The relief sought in CM 428/ 2013
is as follows:
(a)
Issue notice to the
Medical Councils of Delhi and India
and direct them to take cognizance of the petitioner’s complaint against Dr K G
S Bansal that he was party to a conspiracy and attempt to murder the petitioner
on February 17, 2012;
(b)
Direct the State
respondents to investigate and prosecute the petitioner’s complaint regarding
the attempt to murder her on February 17, 201 2;
(c)
Pass such other and
further orders as this Hon’ble
Court may deem fit and proper.
Therefore CM 428/ 2013 pending in
W.P. Civil 1280/ 2012 seeks a criminal investigation into the conspiracy and
attempt to murder/ eliminate me (the petitioner) and into the participation of
Justice A K Sikri and Justice Rajiv Sahai Endlaw in this criminal conspiracy
and attempt to murder me. Justice A K Sikri has since been elevated as a judge
of the Supreme Court of India. The Delhi High Court cannot hear and decide CM
428/ 2013 as it seeks investigation and prosecution (for criminal conspiracy
and attempt to murder) of Justice A K Sikri who is now a sitting Supreme Court
judge. The Delhi High Court cannot therefore hear W.P. Civil 1280/ 2012 and
this matter can only be heard and decided by the Supreme Court of India.
Justice A K Sikri was a senior colleague of both Justice P K Bhasin and
Siddharth Mridul on the Bench in the Delhi High Court. Justice Rajiv Sahai
Endlaw is still a colleague of both Justice P K Bhasin and Siddharth Mridul on
the Bench in the Delhi High Court. There exists a reasonable apprehension of
bias in my mind that Justice P K Bhasin and Justice Rajiv Sahai Endlaw will be
biased in favour of Justice A K Sikri and Justice Rajiv Sahai Endlaw while
deciding CM 428/ 2013 and W.P. Civil 1280/ 2012. I also point out that today
(10 January 2014), Justice P K Bhasin is sitting in a division bench with
Justice Rajiv Sahai Endlaw. How then can later today Justice P K Bhasin hear an
application accusing Justice Rajiv Sahai Endlaw of participation in conspiracy
and attempt to murder me when I mentioned the danger to my life in court 1 on
17 February 2012? I also point out that Justice P K Bhasin is at present
sitting in a regular division bench with Justice Midha who was earlier
attempting to sabotage this matter sitting along with Justice Gita Mittal.
Coplaints and evidence against Justice Gita Mittal and Justice Midha are on the
court record of WP 1280/ 2012.
(ii) CM 5008/ 2013 pending in W.P.
Civil 1280/ 2012 seeks investigation and prosecution of Max Healthcare and two
Max Healthcare Hospitals and several doctors attached to these hospitals for
participation in the conspiracy and attempt to murder/ eliminate me when I approached
these hospitals and doctors with complaints of poisoning in 2012 as described
in detail in this application. One Dr Pervez Ahmed was the CEO of Max
Healthcare at the time the incidents/ acts complained of in CM 5008/ 2013 occurred.
Dr Pervez Ahmed is the brother of Justice Badar Durrez Ahmed. All the doctors
and the hospitals which stand accused in CM 5008/ 2013 were at the relevant
time reporting to Dr Pervez Ahmed. An investigation pursuant to directions
sought in CM 5008/ 2013 will also involve an investigation into the role of Dr
Pervez Ahmed in the conspiracy and attempts to murder/ eliminate and harm the
petitioner by the accused doctors working at Max Healthcare. Dr Pervez Ahmed is
a US
national and appears to have connections to General Electric. Justice Badar
Durrez Ahmed recused himself from hearing this matter without disclosing his
brother’s connection to Max Healthcare. This act of Justice Badar Durrez Ahmed
was improper. Justice Siddharth Mridul is at present sitting in a Division
Bench with Justice Badar Durrez Ahmed. How can Justice Siddharth Mridul
(sitting in a Division Bench with Justice Badar Durrez Ahmed) then hear a
matter in which serious allegations of conspiracy and attempt to murder have
been levelled against doctors and hospitals who/ which were at the relevant
time under the charge of Dr Pervez Ahmed, who is the real brother of Justice
Badar Durrez Ahmed and whose role in this conspiracy and attempt to murder
would also fall within the ambit of a criminal investigation sought in CM 5008/
2013? This amounts to a clear conflict
of interest and creates a reasonable apprehension of bias in my mind which
would disqualify Justice Siddharth Mridul from hearing W.P. (C.) 1280/ 2012.
(iii) The manner in which Justice P
K Bhasin and Justice Siddharth Mridul have handled this matter until now
inspires no faith that I will obtain justice or a fair hearing or a proper
adjudication/ disposal of this matter in accordance with law and natural
justice.
(iv) Justice P K Bhasin first attempted to subvert
and sabotage the proceedings in this writ petition in May 2012 when he heard
this tender matter sitting in a single Bench in violation of the prescribed
Delhi High Court roster and without legal authority and jurisdiction.
(v) Justice P K Bhasin and Justice
Siddharth Mridul are now again attempting to sabotage and prevent the hearing
of this writ petition and are also intentionally delaying the hearing of this
writ petition in order to facilitate the ongoing poisoning and mental and
physical torture of the petitioner. Their intent is to delay the hearing of
this petition until the petitioner is fully or partially incapacitated or
hospitalised or destroyed or murdered or eliminated in some other manner and until
the petitioner becomes unable to pursue this writ petition and appear before
the court.
(vi) This matter has been listed
before the Division Bench of Justice P K Bhasin and Justice Siddharth Mridul on
7 October 2013, 9 October 2013, 11 October 2013, 8 January 2014 and is now
listed before this Bench on 10 January 2014.
(vii) On 7 October 2014, an attempt
was first made by Justice P K Bhasin and Justice Siddharth Mridul to trick the
petitioner into not being present for this matter by using the court master to
deceive the petitioner as to when the Special Bench would convene. When the
matter was finally taken up on 7 October 2013, the petitioner stated that she
was requesting recusal by Justice P K Bhasin and as the Bench wanted to know
why, the petitioner sought time to file an affidavit setting out the grounds
for the request for recusal. Justice P K Bhasin and Justice Siddharth Mridul
asked the petitioner to approach the Chief Justice of the Delhi High Court
seeking a transfer of this matter and wanted to adjourn the matter to 11
October 2013, a Friday, but upon the petitioner’s request the matter was posted
on 9 October 2013. On 8 October 2013, the petitioner was targeted by Delhi
Police on Delhi High Court premises as described in the petitioner’s complaint
dated 8 October 2013 to the Chief Justice of the Delhi High Court which made it
impossible for the petitioner to file the proposed affidavit/ application
seeking recusal by Justice P K Bhasin.
(viii) This
matter was listed before Justice P K Bhasin and Justice Siddharth Mridul on 9
October 2013. At 10.30 am, parties were informed that the Special Bench of
Justice P K Bhasin and Justice Siddhartha Mridul would sit for this matter at
12.45 pm. When the matter was called out, the petitioner orally requested
Justice P K Bhasin to recuse himself but he did not respond on this request. The
petitioner drew the court’s attention to the contents of the complaint dated 8
October 2013 and to the contents of CM 8677/ 2012 in which the petitioner had
stated on 11 July 2012 that:
“I do not
have any confidence in Justice P K Bhasin. He refused to help me on May 30, 2012.
On four hearings, he refused to allow me to argue or even speak. He attempted
to sabotage this petition by directing that the respondents would not be
allowed to file counter affidavits and then modified his order dated May 25,
2012 after I filed CM No. 7012 of 2012 on May 26, 2012. Justice P K Bhasin
suggested that I had it coming when I told him that I had been illegally
evicted on May 30, 2012.
“Nevertheless,
I am constrained to file this application because I need shelter. I request
that Justice P K Bhasin not hear this matter but list it before another bench.
This matter needs to be heard today because I do not have shelter for tonight.”
On 9
October 2013, Justice Siddharth Mridul stated that CM 8677/ 2012 did not
contain a prayer for recusal by Justice P K Bhasin. I requested that in that
case I was seeking a short adjournment to file an application with an express
prayer that Justice P K Bhasin not hear this matter. Justice Siddhartha Mridul
indicated that I was free to do so. On 9 October 2013, even after I stated that
I would be filing an application seeking recusal by Justice P K Bhasin, Justice
P K Bhasin asked me to argue the matter. Justice P K Bhasin then
started to dictate an order that the matter was being adjourned at the
petitioner’s request. I insisted that the order record that the request for an
adjournment was to enable me to file an application seeking recusal by Justice
P K Bhasin. Eventually Justice P K Bhasin recorded in his order that I was
seeking time to file such an application. I requested an adjournment till 21
October 2013 (in view of court vacations in the week commencing 14 October
2013). However, shockingly and with clear intent to vindictively target and
victimise me, Justice P K Bhasin insisted on adjourning the matter to 7 January
2014. I repeatedly requested that the matter be posted either on 21 October
2013 or on 11 October 2013, yet the
Bench refused to give a shorter date. I pointed out to the court that I was
sleeping in my car and needed urgent orders for housing and protection and that
the adjournment of the matter to 7 January 2014 would deprive me of my constitutional
rights, place my life at risk, and asked if the Bench wanted me to continue
sleeping in my car for the next three months including in the winter. I pointed
out that the Judges were targeting me by depriving me of my legal remedies for
another three months. There was no response from Justice P K Bhasin or Justice
Siddharth Mridul to this and they left the court. It is also pointed out that
during the court hearing on 9 October 2013, Justice P K Bhasin expressed views
that displayed his bias towards General Electric. During the hearing, Mr Nanju Ganpathy
rose to address the court and I objected stating that he had not filed valid vakalatnamas
and could not represent the three General Electric companies. In an attempt to
protect Mr Nanju Ganpathy and General Electric from the consequences of
appearing without proper authority documents, Justice P K Bhasin stated that
this issue would only be decided after the court heard me on merits. It is
submitted that this position is incorrect. According to law, the court cannot
permit a lawyer to represent a party without a proper vakalatnama and the
continued appearance of Mr Nanju Ganpathy in this matter violates the law. This
court has to decide my application CM 10493/ 2013 on this issue before hearing
the matter on merits. Mr Nanju Ganpathy’s appearance in this matter on 9
October 2013 violated the law and the court ought not to have permitted him to
appear or to record his appearance. It is also a matter of concern, that
Justice Siddharth Mridul suggested to me during the court hearing on 9 October
2013 that I not pursue my several applications in this matter including CM
10493/ 2013 and suggested that I focus on the main petition itself, It is
submitted that this suggestion by Justice Siddhartha Mridul was wholly
inappropriate, improper and made with the intent to subvert and sabotage the
writ proceedings and prevent a judicial hearing and determination of the
petitioner’s various application and the writ petition in accordance with law.
This suggestion would benefit General Electric and those who have physically
and otherwise caused harm and injury to me. Justice P K Bhasin and Justice
Siddhartha Mridul had no reason or justification to adjourn this matter to 7
January 2014 and this act on their part showed a clear intent to target the
petitioner, to continue to place her life at risk, and to continue to allow
General Electric and the State respondents to cover up the corruption
complaints in the present petition. These judges were aware that adjourning
this matter to 7 January 2014 would prevent a timely hearing of CM 7197/ 2013
(which is lying unheard before the court since 31 May 2013) in which I have sought
the following urgent relief:
“PRAYER
It is therefore most respectfully prayed that this Hon’ble Court may
be pleased to:
(d)
Stay the decision of the
Cabinet dated 1 May 2013 to cancel the impugned tenders and to issue new RFQs
and RFPs for the ELF and DLF Projects or to proceed with the new Bidding
Process for these Projects until this writ petition is heard and finally
decided and until the complaints made in this writ petition are dealt with in
accordance with law;
(e)
Injunct/ restrain
respondents 4 and 5 (Railway Ministry and the Union of India through the PMO)
from proceeding further with the bid process under the two RFQs issued on 6 May
2013 (Global RFQ No. 2013/M/ (W)/ 964/33 dated May, 2013, and Global RFQ
No. 2013/Elect (Dev)/440/7 dated 6 May, 2013) until
this writ petition is heard and finally decided;
(f)
Injunct/ restrain
respondents 4 and 5 (Railway Ministry and the Union of India through the PMO)
from issuing the RFQ documents for DLF and ELF (for Global RFQ No.
2013/M/ (W)/ 964/33 dated May, 2013, and for Global RFQ No. 2013/Elect
(Dev)/440/7 dated 6 May, 2013) to General Electric
Company, or to GE India Industrial Private Limited, or to GE Global Sourcing
India Private Limited or to any of their associate companies and/or from
receiving applications for prequalification under these RFQs from any of these
companies or their associates until this writ petition is heard and finally
decided;
(g)
Injunct/ restrain
respondents 4 and 5 (Railway Ministry and the Union of India through the PMO)
from short-listing General Electric Company or GE India Industrial Private
Limited, or GE Global Sourcing India Private Limited or any of their associate
companies under Global RFQ No. 2013/M/ (W)/ 964/33 dated May, 2013, and
Global RFQ No. 2013/Elect (Dev)/440/7 dated 6 May, 2013 until this writ petition is heard and finally decided;
(h)
Direct the PMO and the
Railway Ministry to file separate affidavits (through the Principal Secretary,
PMO and the Chairman of the Railway Board respectively) answering the questions
raised in this application;
(i)
Direct the Railway
Ministry to blacklist General Electric Company, GE India Industrial Private Limited, GE Global
Sourcing India Private Limited and all and any of their associate companies from
participation in any Railway Tenders including (Global RFQ No. 2013/M/
(W)/ 964/33 dated May, 2013, and Global RFQ No. 2013/Elect (Dev)/440/7 dated 6
May, 2013) for a minimum period of two years;
(j)
Pass such other and
further orders as this Hon’ble
Court may deem fit and proper.”
(ix) I therefore
filed an application seeking recusal from this matter (and from Criminal
Contempt Case 3/ 2012) by both Justice P K Bhasin and Justice Siddharth Mridul.
In this application I requested that
both Justice P K Bhasin and Justice Siddhartha Mridul recuse themselves from
hearing this matter forthwith and that the matter be listed for hearing before
another Bench (subject to the orders of the Chief Justice) for day to day
hearing starting 21 October 2013. In this application I stated that my life is
in danger, and that I am sleeping on the street without any protection and that
attempts to drug me, poison me, and even to abduct me continue. I further stated
that I was being tortured both physically and mentally on a daily basis to
cause me to fall ill and to break down mentally. In these circumstances and
with these facts (and supporting evidence) on record, it was unconscionable for
Justice P K Bhasin and for Justice Siddhartha Mridul to adjourn this matter to
7 January 2014.
(x) The application for recusal by
Justice P K Bhasin and Justice Siddharth Mridul (CM 14194/ 2013) came up for
hearing on 11 October 2013 when a perverse order was passed by this Bench wrongly
dismissing this application as frivolous and vexatious, without giving any valid
reasons. During the hearing on 11 October 2013, the Bench attempted to
intimidate the petitioner by repeatedly reading out Justice Rajiv Shakder’s
order dated 26 November 2013 targeting the petitioner. The Bench wrongly dismissed
the application for recusal and further vindictively refused to provide me with
a dasti copy of the order despite my request.
(xi) Justice P K Bhasin and Justice
Siddharth Mridul knowingly adjourned this matter to 7 January 2014 knowing
fully well that this date was a court holiday.
(xii) Justice P K Bhasin and
Justice Siddharth Mridul deliberately falsified their court orders dated 7, 9
and 11 October to create a false impression that the petitioner was not ready
to argue the matter, and that she was making a frivolous and vexatious request
that these judges recuse from hearing the matter. They also falsified these
court orders to create a false impression that due to the conduct of the
petitioner from day one several judges had refused to hear this matter and
falsely suggested that this was the fault of the petitioner.
(xiii) Because of the orders passed
by Justice P K Bhasin and Justice Siddharth Mridul on 7, 9, and 11 October
2013, the petitioner continued to be poisoned through October, November,
December and now January 2014. The petitioner’s lung X-ray dated 23 December
2013 establishes that the petitioner’s lungs were again poisoned during this
period. The petitioner has made police complaints about these attacks on the
petitioner during this period. The petitioner has also been compelled to
continue sleeping in her car (which was also tampered with) during this period
where she has continued to be poisoned. Further the petitioner’s property was
targeted and destroyed, she was targeted on Delhi High Court premises, and she
had to raise funds from lawyers to be able to survive the winter.
(xiv) The petitioner points out that she was poisoned
with intent to make her ill during the winter vacations. If the petitioner had
been eliminated, then the matter which was adjourned to a court holiday would
have quietly lied in cold storage.
(xv) When the petitioner pointed
out to Court registry officials that 7 January 2014 was a court holiday, this
matter was finally listed on 8 January 2014.
(xvi) When this matter was listed
on 8 January 2014, I was concerned that Justice P K Bhasin and Justice
Siddharth Mridul would again intimidate me in court and then again falsify
court orders to target me. Therefore I decided to see how the Bench behaved on
8 January 2014. Though I have no faith in this Bench and I intend to approach the
Supreme Court of India, yet on 8 January 2014 I decided to wait and see how the
Bench conducted itself. I did not want to provide another opportunity to this
Bench to unfairly target me by misrepresenting my submissions or the facts of
this case and by falsifying court orders including creating false records of
what transpired in court.
(xvii) On 8 January 2014, Justice P
K Bhasin informed me in the morning that the matter would be taken up at 3.30
pm. Justice Siddharth Mridul is since January 2, 2014 sitting in a Division
Bench with Justice Badar Durrez Ahmed. Therefore the Special Bench for the
captioned matter only convened after both the regular Division Benches of
Justice P K Bhasin and Justice Midha and that of Justice Badar Durrez Ahmed and
Justice Siddharth Mridul had finished their work for the day. I have already
pointed out that a grave complaint of conspiracy and attempt to murder has been
made by me against Justice A K Sikri which is the subject matter of CM 428/
2013 in WP Civil 1280/ 2012. I point out that Mr Ravi Sikri, brother of Justice
A K Sikri appeared before the Division Bench of Justice Badar Durrez Ahmed and
Justice Siddharth Mridul on 8 January 2014 in item 3. Item 3 (an MTNL matter)
went on from at least 1.45 am until 3 pm. I point out that both Justice Badar
Durrez Ahmed and Ravi Sikri have a conflict of interest against my matter and
both were responsible for my matter not being taken up for hearing until 3.30
pm on 8 January 2014.
(xviii) On 8 January 2014, when the
writ petition was taken up at 3.30 pm, I decided to proceed with preliminary
and introductory remarks. After briefly telling the court that the matter
concerned the Madhepura and Marhowra Railway Projects and tenders, I pointed
out that no one was present in court for the PMO (UOI), or the Railway Ministry
or for the Delhi Police. I showed the Bench the memo of parties in the writ
petition and showed the Bench the orders issuing notice to all the respondents.
I also pointed out to the Bench that Mt R V Sinha was purporting to appear for
the CVC without filing a vakalatnama and that he could not therefore be allowed
to represent the CVC. I also pointed out to the Bench that the applications filed
by me establishing that one Mr K R Radhakrishnan claiming to represent and to
be the authorised signatory of General Electric Company, GE India Industrial
Private Limited, and GE Global Sourcing India Private Limited had no legal
authority to represent these companies in these proceedings and establishing
that the affidavits and vakalatnamas filed by him for these companies were
invalid, nauthorised, false and
perjurious required to be heard first before anything else. I was in the midst
of these introductory remarks when suddenly out of the blue Justice P K Bhasin
stated that the Bench could refer all my complaints to the CBI for
investigation. I pointed out to the court that a CBI investigation would follow
but that the court first needed to hear me on merits, first needed to dispose
of all pending applications one by one, several procedural orders were needed
beforevthe matter could be heard, that there were several prayers in the writ
and in applications which required orders from the court, and that the court
had to discharge its judicial function and could not avoid hearing the writ and
applications on merits. I also pointed out to the Court that what Justice P K
Bhasin was suggesting would only result in a cover up of the corruption
complaints. At this Justice P K Bhasin attempted to pressurize me by pointedly
asking me whether I was not confident that the court would grant my prayer for
a CBI inquiry. I replied that I was but that the court needed to hear me,
decide the matter on merits and could not avoid a judicial determination of the
matter by the device of referring my complaints to the CBI. I point out that
this writ petition has been pending for 2 years and it has remained unheard for
2 years. And on 8 January 2014, Justice P K Bhasin was attempting to prevent a
judicial hearing and determination of this matter. I also point out that the
conduct of the CBI and the CVC in this matter shows that the State agencies
(including the CVC and the CBI which are controlled by the executive) have
colluded with General Electric in attempting to subvert and sabotage this writ
petition and to cover up the complaints of corruption, fraud, bribery, forgery
and illegal lobbying against General Electric and Montek Singh Ahluwalia which
are the subject matter of this writ petition. Therefore Justice P K Bhasin’s
suggestion was prima facie motivated and malafide and discloses the intent to
prevent this matter from getting a full, fair and impartial hearing in court. On
8 January 2014, the Bench interrupted me at 4.15 and told me that they were out
of time. No order was dictated in court and I expected that the court order
dated 8 January 2014 would simply state that the matter was being renotified.
(xix) I inspected the court file on
9 January 2014 and noted that the court order signed on 8 January 2014 was
misleading. It misrecords the appearance of parties. No one appeared for the
railways or the Delhi
police or for respondents 13 to 17. Yet the signed court order records the
appearance of lawyers for these respondents who were not present in court. More
importantly I had during my preliminary submissions objected to the appearance
of Mr Nanju Ganpathy for the three General Electric respondents without proper
authority documents and to the appearance of Mr R V Sinha for the CVC without a
vakalatnama. I did not state that R N Singh was not authorised to represent the
Railways. The signed order dated 8 January 2014 misrecords that I had also
objected to the appearance of Mr R N Singh for the Railways. More surprisingly,
the signed order proceeds to record the appearance of both Mr Nanju Ganpathy
and Mr R V Sinha. This is therefore a patently illegal order passed by Justice
P K Bhasin and Justice Siddharth Mridul especially when these judges had during
the hearing on 8 January 2014 asked the court master to check the court record
for any vakalatnama filed by R V Sinha and no such vakalatnama was found to be
on record. I point out that R V Sinha has merely filed a memo of appearance
signed only by him and this document cannot confer authority on him to
represent the CVC in these proceedings. This memo of appearance filed on 14
January 2013 is at pages 78-79 of Part B of the court file in WP Civil 1280/
2012. Lastly the order also misrecords that “part submissions” have been made
by the petitioner. In fact I only made a few introductory remarks that will
impact upon how the court proceeds to hear this matter. The matter was heard
for about 30-40 minutes. This matter is not part-heard.
(xx) I also point out that when on
8 January 2014, Justice P K Bhasin and Justice Siddharth Mridul wanted to
adjourn the matter to Friday, 10 January, 2014, I strongly requested that the
matter be heard either on Thursday or on Monday but not on Friday as it is very
unlikely that this matter will be heard on Fridays as there are several special
benches on Fridays and several matters fail to get heard due to paucity of
time. Despite my requests, for no valid reason Justice P K Bhasin and Justice
Siddharth Mridul insisted that they would only hear this matter on Friday. Justice
Siddharth Mridul also misrepresented to me that special bench matters were not
being taken up on weekdays other than Fridays. Earlier on 7 October 2013, Justice P K Bhasin and Justice Siddharth Mridul had also
attempted to send this matter to a Friday. At that time also I had objected to
this. If this matter is posted only on Fridays then it will never get heard as
essentially the Special Benches that sit on Fridays result in a musical chairs
like situation where there is no time for matters to get heard or for Special
Benches to sit. Posting this matter on a Friday is intended to prevent this
matter from being heard.
(xxi) Justice
P K Bhasin cannot hear this matter as he has already attempted to sabotage and
subvert the present petition, in May 2012 he facilitated the illegal eviction
of the petitioner and was part of a conspiracy to steal her medical records and
other belongings with intent to plant false evidence among these belongings
with intent to falsely depict me as mentally or physically ill. This matter was listed before Justice P K
Bhasin sitting singly on 25 May 2012; 28 May 2012, 29 May 2012; and on 30 May
2012. This is a tender matter as recorded by this court’s order dated 5
December 2012 and as per the court roster it is required to be heard by a
Division Bench.
Yet from
2 March 2012 till 26 November 2012, this matter was listed and heard by several
judges of this Hon’ble Court
sitting alone. These include Justice Hima Kohli, Justice Sunil Gaur, Justice
Indermeet Kaur, Justice P K Bhasin and Justice Rajiv Shakdher. Not only was it
improper for the court registry to list this matter before Single Judges, it
was also improper and inappropriate for all these named single judges (Justice
Hima Kohli, Justice Sunil Gaur, Justice Indermeet Kaur, Justice P K Bhasin and
Justice Rajiv Shakdher) to hear this matter when according to the court roster
itself, a tender matter like this matter is required to be heard by a Division
Bench. The petitioner has already placed on record affidavits describing in
detail how all these five single judges handled court hearings in this matter.
These five single judges knew that according to the court roster they had no
jurisdiction to hear this matter yet they continued to do so until the petitioner
became aware of the court roster requirements and moved CM 19197/ 2012 which
resulted in this matter going to a Division Bench because of the order dated 5
December 2012.
The
captioned writ petition is a whistleblower corruption writ petition against a
very powerful entity General Electric Company and that the evidence of
criminality and illegality extends to the highest levels of the Indian
Government, i.e., to Mr Montek Singh Ahluwalia, a close aide of the Prime
Minister (Dr Manmohan Singh), and to the PMO including to Dr Manmohan Singh
himself. Bribes paid by General Electric Company have been paid to government
and political leaders at the highest level and the recipients could include Dr
Manmohan Singh himself, Mrs Sonia Gandhi and Mr Rahul Gandhi. The orders passed
in this matter show a disturbing pattern of attempts to subvert and sabotage
the present petition in order to cover up the corruption complaints against
General Electric.
I had
earlier raised additional concerns about Justice P K Bhasin in connection with
this matter in CM 8677/2012 filed on 11 July 2012 and pending unheard till now.
This
matter was listed on May 25, 2012 before Justice P K Bhasin. Justice P K Bhasin
refused to hear the petitioner on that date and on his own passed a useless “protection
order” (which was never complied with by the police) that incorrectly recorded that
the petitioner had stated that she has merely been threatened and intimidated
by the police. The petitioner’s complaints made to the police commissioner on
email, repeated verbally in court on several occasions and in her writ
petition, are that the police is complicit in, has colluded in, has facilitated
and participated in drugging and poisoning the petitioner and in exposing her
to harmful chemicals. The police has followed, harassed, intimidated and
threatened the petitioner. Senior police
officials have not only failed to protect the petitioner but have used their
subordinates to facilitate the harm caused to the petitioner.
On May
25, 2012, the petitioner asked Justice P K Bhasin to hear the petitioner before
the court holidays but he refused and instead passed an order of protection
which was not the kind of protection that the petitioner had sought in her
petition and application for interim relief. This protection order was as
stated earlier useless. Justice P K Bhasin deliberately stopped the junior
proxy counsel appearing for the police on that date from asking obtaining a
dasti copy of the court protection order. Justice P K Bhasin knew that this
order would not be implemented.
On that
date, Justice P K Bhasin while dictating his order in court ordered that the respondents
would not be permitted to file their counter affidavits or replies. The petitioner
appeared before Justice P K Bhasin after lunch and requested that the respondents
be asked to file counter affidavits because the petition could not be decided without
these. At this time, Justice P K Bhasin told the petitioner in open court that
in the absence of counter affidavits the petitioner’s facts would be accepted
as uncontested. Justice P K Bhasin was attempting to trick the petitioner into
believing that the order disallowing counter affidavits was in the petitioner’s
favour. Despite this, the petitioner filed an application that the respondents be
directed to file counter affidavits. This application was listed on May 28,
2012. Inexplicably, Justice P K Bhasin without prior intimidation did not hold
court that day.
The order
passed by Justice P K Bhasin on May 25, 2012 was uploaded onto the Delhi High
Court website and was seen by the petitioner in the late evening of May 27,
2012. The signed order dated May 25, 2012 only contained a direction that the
respondents would not be permitted to file replies to the petitioner’s
application. No mention was made about counter affidavits. As stated earlier
Justice P K Bhasin had clearly also issued a similar direction about counter
affidavits in court on May 25, 2012. Justice P K Bhasin modified his order
dated May 25, 2012 on this issue after the petitioner had served a copy of CM
7012 of 2012 on the respondents on May 26, 2012 in which she placed these facts
on record and asked for directions that counter affidavits and replies be filed.
On May
29, 2012, Justice P K Bhasin again refused to hear the matter on that day and
adjourned the applications listed on that day to July 19, 2012. The petitioner
was not permitted to argue her application for interim protection and for
provision of a safe place to stay.
On May
30, 2012, again Justice P K Bhasin refused to hear the petitioner’s application
for interim protection orders and for provision of a safe place to stay. On
this date however, he directed the respondents to file their counter affidavits
and replies. The petitioner points out that even on May 30, 2012, Justice P K
Bhasin first insisted that the respondents would not be permitted to file
replies and did not permit the petitioner to make her submissions on why these
replies were necessary. Justice P K Bhasin told the petitioner that she could
not force the respondents to file replies. The counsel for the Union of India,
Ms Sapna Chauhan told the court that the Union of India wished to file its
reply and that she had received some instructions from “VIP security police”.
Mr Nanju Ganpathy, also told the court that General Electric wanted to file its
reply. It was only after these lawyers stated that they wanted to file replies,
that Justice P K Bhasin passed an order directing the respondents to file their
replies.
The same
day, on May 30, 2012, I was evicted from her residence in my absence while I
was in court and while I was drafting further motions in this matter. On May
30, 2012, I was present in the Delhi High court for this very matter. Sometime
during the afternoon while I was in court, I was evicted from my residence in
my absence. I accessed a text message sent to my phone that afternoon at around
4 pm. I was in the Delhi High Court the entire day and my phone was either on
silent or was switched off. At around 4.15 pm I saw the following text message
on my phone which was sent from the number 9811454468. This text was sent to me
shortly after 2 pm and read:
“There is an order of the Saket dist court against you to
vacate G-4 jangpura first floor. I along with the court appointed bailiff and
police personel are standing and taking over the possession. I have call you
thrice but you have not responded. This is for your information.
shivam sharma”
I checked
my phone and there were three missed calls from this number at 2:18 pm, 2:19
pm, and 2:21 pm. I immediately went to Justice P K Bhasin’s who had passed the
order dated May 25, 2012 and before whom the matter had been listed on May 30,
2012. I told Justice Bhasin that I had been illegally evicted and I had nowhere
to stay. I made an oral prayer that he pass orders directing the Union of India
to immediately provide me with safe accommodation. Justice P K Bhasin refused
to pass any order. He made the strange remark that the eviction was a result of
what I had been doing. Justice P K Bhasin suggested that the illegal eviction
was a consequence of the applications I had moved in CWP 1280 on three
consecutive days, i.e., on 28, 29 and 30th May. I point out that General
Electric’s lawyers also knew that I intended to file further applications including
an appeal. I had told Mr Nanju Ganpathy that I would file an appeal in the
Supreme Court of India against the failure of Justice P K Bhasin to hear CM
7175/ 2012 and issue notice to respondents 13, 14, 15, 16 & 17 on May 29,
2012. .
In CM
8677/ 2012 filed on 11 July 2012, I had stated: “I do not have any confidence
in Justice P K Bhasin. He refused to help me on May 30, 2012. On four hearings,
he refused to allow me to argue or even speak. He attempted to sabotage this
petition by directing that the respondents would not be allowed to file counter
affidavits and then modified his order dated May 25, 2012 after I filed CM No.
7012 of 2012 on May 26, 2012. Justice P K Bhasin suggested that I had it coming
when I told him that I had been illegally evicted on May 30, 2012.
Nevertheless,
I am constrained to file this application because I need shelter. I request that Justice P K Bhasin not hear
this matter but list it before another bench. This matter needs to be heard
today because I do not have shelter for tonight.”
Justice P K Bhasin has a general
reputation amongst the lawyer community of being corrupt. It is clear from the
above facts that he has been approached by General Electric and that he intends
to subvert and sabotage the captioned writ petition and prevent it from being
heard with intent to cover up the corruption complaints against General
Electric. I have been rendered homeless because of Justice P K Bhasin, I have
been poisoned because of Justice P K Bhasin, more than one conspiracy and
attempt on my life was enabled by Justice P K Bhasin. As is apparent from the
orders passed by Justice P K Bhasin and Justice Siddharth Mridul in October
2013 and their conduct during the court hearing on 8 January 2014, Justice P K
Bhasin and Justice Siddharth Mridul intend to facilitate the cover up of the
corruption complaints in the writ petition and not only do they have no regard
for my well-being and right to life but they have and they are continuing to
facilitate my destruction, my poisoning and elimination. Further the Bench is
targeting me using illegal contempt proceedings and threats.
Justice P K Bhasin and Justice
Siddharth Mridul are not hearing this matter in accordance with the principles
of fair play and natural justice. Instead they are displaying an open bias
towards General Electric and are attempting to trick me in court and are
falsifying court proceedings, modifying and falsifying court orders, and in
total disregard of my right to life are preventing me from obtaining a full,
fair, and timely hearing in court.
I again request that Writ Petition
Civil 1280/ 2012 be sent to the Chief Justice of India with a request that this
matter be heard by the Supreme Court of India. In the alternative I request
that this matter be placed before a Division Bench not comprising of Justice P
K Bhasin and Justice Siddharth Mridul until this matter can be transferred to
the Supreme Court of India.
Seema Sapra
Advocate
9582716748
Presently homeless
No comments:
Post a Comment