From: Seema Sapra <seema.sapra@googlemail.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2026, 19:35
Subject: Cases of Seema Sapra adjourned to 19 March 2026, am back in Rajokari from Delhi High Court, Poisonous chemicals again being released into my premises - Ongoing attempt to murder GE Aerospace Whistleblower Seema Sapra
To: <splcp.ap@delhipolice.gov.in>, <splcp.eow@delhipolice.gov.in>, <splcp.hq@delhipolice.gov.in>, <splcp.int@delhipolice.gov.in>, <splcp.legaldivision@delhipolice.gov.in>, <splcp.ops@delhipolice.gov.in>, <jtcp.crime@delhipolice.gov.in>, <jtcp.er@delhipolice.gov.in>, <jtcp.eow@delhipolice.gov.in>, Seema Sapra <seema.sapra.office@gmail.com>, <addlcp.sec@delhipolice.gov.in>, <addlcp.pers@delhipolice.gov.in>, <dcp.security@delhipolice.gov.in>, <jtcp-nr-dl@nic.in>, <pro@delhipolice.gov.in>, <dcp.splcell@delhipolice.gov.in>, <addlcp-secureitysg@delhipolice.gov.in>, <splcp.losouth@delhipolice.gov.in>, <splcp.lonorth@delhipolice.gov.in>, <dcp.igia@delhipolice.gov.in>, <dcp.splcellsr@delhipolice.gov.in>, <dcp.lic@delhipolice.gov.in>, <splcp-crime-dl@nic.in>, <addlcp.tech.pi@delhipolice.gov.in>, <addlcp.spuwc@delhipolice.gov.in>, <jtcp-training-dl@delhipolice.gov.in>, <dcp.anticorruption@delhipolice.gov.in>, <dcp.2bn@delhipolice.gov.in>, <dcp3.bndp@delhipolice.gov.in>, <dcp.4bn@delhipolice.gov.in>, <dcp.5bn@delhipolice.gov.in>, <dcp.7bn@delhipolice.gov.in>, <dcp.1bn@delhipolice.gov.in>, <dcp-crimehq1@delhipolice.gov.in>, <dcpcrime-iv@delhipolice.gov.in>, <dcpcrime-v@delhipolice.gov.in>, <dcp.decell@delhipolice.gov.in>, <dcp-dwk-dl@delhipolice.gov.in>, <dcp.east@delhipolice.gov.in>, <dcp.ga@delhipolice.gov.in>, <dcp-hdqtr4@delhipolice.gov.in>, <dcpit-dp@nic.in>, <dcphq1.welfare@delhipolice.gov.in>, <dcp.estt@delhipolice.gov.in>, <dcp-security-sg@delhipolice.gov.in>, <dcp.sec@delhipolice.gov.in>, <dcp.supremecourt@delhipolice.gov.in>, <dcp-shahdara@delhipolice.gov.in>, <dcp.seast@delhipolice.gov.in>, <dcp.sw@delhipolice.gov.in>, <dcp.south@delhipolice.gov.in>, <dcp-splbranch-dl@nic.in>, <dcp-ifso@delhipolice.gov.in>, <dcp.spuwc@delhipolice.gov.in>, <dcp-dap8-dl@delhipolice.gov.in>, <dcp.central@delhipolice.gov.in>, <dcp.lb@delhipolice.gov.in>, <dcp-railways-dl@delhipolice.gov.in>, <dcp-rohini-dl@delhipolice.gov.in>, <dcp-securitypm-dl@nic.in>, <dcptrafficndr@gmail.com>, <dcptsr.dtp@nic.in>, <dcp.tfcwr@delhipolice.gov.in>, <dcp-vigilance-dl@nic.in>, <nivnd@state.gov>, <protocolnewdelhi@state.gov>, <hydcea@state.gov>, <chennaiciu@state.gov>, <consularkolkata@state.gov>, <mumbaiconsdirect@state.gov>, <mddphcl@hotmail.com>, <suhel.daud@ic.fbi.gov>, <jorgan.andrews@state.gov>, <jorgan@state.gov>, <adcp1-dwk-dl@delhipolice.gov.in>, <adcp1.east@delhipolice.gov.in>, <dcp.west@delhipolice.gov.in>, <dcp.tfcr@delhipolice.gov.in>, <dcp.tfcer@delhipolice.gov.in>, <dcp.tfchq@delhipolice.gov.in>, <dcp.dtpmod@delhipolice.gov.in>, <adcp1-northwest-dl@nic.in>, <adcp1.north@delhipolice.gov.in>, <adcp1.outernorth@delhipolice.gov.in>, <adcp1.outer@delhipolice.gov.in>, <adcp1-rohini-dl@delhipoice.gov.in>, <dcp1-shahdara@delhipolice.gov.in>, <adcp1.seast@delhipolice.gov.in>, <adcp1.sw@delhipolice.gov.in>, <adcp1.south@delhipolice.gov.in>, <adcp1.west@delhipolice.gov.in>, <addl-dcp2-central-dl@nic.in>, <adcp2.swest@delhipolice.gov.in>, <adcp2.east@delhipolice.gov.in>, <adcp2.ndelhi@delhipolice.gov.in>, <adcp2.neast@delhipolice.gov.in>, <adcp2.outernorth@delhipolice.gov.in>, <adcp2.outer@delhipolice.gov.in>, <adcp2-rohini-dl@delhipolice.gov.in>, <adcp2-shahdara@delhipolice.gov.in>, <adcp2.seast@delhipolice.gov.in>, <adcp2.sw@delhipolice.gov.in>, <adcp2.south@delhipolice.gov.in>, <adcp2.west@delhipolice.gov.in>, <dco-security-pr@delhipolice.gov.in>, <hshso@mha.gov.in>, REGISTRAR GENERAL Delhi High Court <rg.dhc@nic.in>, <chairmanoffice@sec.gov>, <ndwebmail@state.gov>, <sho-vksouth-dl@nic.in>, <sho.vkunjsouth@delhipolice.gov.in>, <lggc.delhi@nic.in>, <acp.vasantkunj@delhipolice.gov.in>, <sho-vknorth-dl@nic.in>, <adcp2.nwd-dl@nic.in>, <sho-vasantvhr-dl@nic.in>, delhilawyer2025 <delhilawyer2025@gmail.com>, <cp.sbksingh@delhipolice.gov.in>, <adcp.swest@delhipolice.gov.in>, <dcp-southwest-dl@nic.in>, <dcp-newdelhi-dl@nic.in>, DCP New Delhi District <dcp.nd@delhipolice.gov.in>, <acp-ndr-splcell-dl@nic.in>, <dcp-nd@delhipolice.gov.in>, <addl-dcp1-nd-dl@delhipolice.gov.in>, <fcpa.fraud@usdoj.gov>, <help@sec.gov>, <adcp1.central@delhipolice.gov.in>, <ndfpu@state.gov>, <osd.cpdelhi@delhipolice.gov.in>, <dcp2.eow@delhipolice.gov.in>, <dcp.eow@delhipolice.gov.in>, <p.pts.jk@delhipolice.gov.in>, <dcp-south-dl@nic.in>, DCP South-East Delhi Ploice <dcp.se@delhipolice.gov.in>, <adcp2.north@delhipolice.gov.in>, <addlcp.tfchq@delhipolice.gov.in>, <dcp.splcellmac@delhipolice.gov.in>, <ivnd@state.gov>, <adcp1.ndelhi@delhipolice.gov.in>, <adcp1.neast@delhipolice.gov.in>, <ppts.wbad@delhipolice.gov.in>, <dphcltd@delhipolice.gov.in>, <cpdelhi@delhipolice.gov.in>, <acsnd@state.gov>, <delpol.service@delhipolice.gov.in>, <addlcp.trafficzone2@delhipolice.gov.in>, <addlcp.ga@delhipolice.gov.in>, <addlcp.trafficzone1@delhipolice.gov.in>, Seema Sapra <seema.sapra@gmail.com>
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION NO OF 2026
IN
WRIT PETITION CIVIL NO. 12969 OF 2025
IN THE MATTER OF
Seema Sapra … Petitioner
Versus
Amit Goel IPS AGMUT 2014 & Others … Respondents
APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 151 CPC AND INVOKING THE INHERENT POWERS OF THIS HON'BLE COURT AND REQUESTING RECUSAL BY THE BENCH OF JUSTICE NITIN SAMBRE AND JUSTICE MADHU JAIN WHICH HEARD THE PETITIONER'S CASES ON 20 AUGUST 2025
1. At the outset the Petitioner reiterates her full respect for the Judiciary and the current Bench. However, she requests that the present Bench recuse from hearing the cases of the Petitioner. The Petitioner has lost faith in the present Bench for the reasons elaborated below.
2. On 20 August 2025, 35 cases of the Petitioner were listed before the present Bench.
3. Since the present Bench in August 2025 was new to the Delhi High Court and was (unlike several other Judges of the same Court who as Advocates have seen the litigation and events unfold) unaware of the background of the cases, the Petitioner started with a brief background of the history of the litigation dating back to 2012 and rooted in her employment as in house counsel with GE India Industrial Private Limited in 2010.
4. After this brief but incomplete summary and history, the Petitioner turned to Writ Petition Civil 14578/2024 and submitted that in order to take the matters forward, the Court should issue notice in this case on 20 August 2025.
5. The Petitioner by way of background had elaborated that the threat and danger to her life emanated from (i) her sexual assault and sexual harassment complaints against Soli Sorabjee and Raian Karanjawala and (ii) from her corruption complaints against General Electric Company which were the subject of Writ Petition Civil 1280/2012.
6. The Petitioner had on 20 August 2025 submitted that the judgment of the Delhi High Court in Writ Petition Civil 1280/2012 was vitiated by fraud on the Court for several reasons, one of which was that lawyers from AZB & Partners including Advocate Nanju Ganpathy then a Partner in AZB & Partners, had appeared as Counsel in WPC 1280/2012 for General Electric Company and its two Respondent subsidiaries using forged authority documents.
7. The Petitioner had among other submissions made the following submissions in Court during the 20 August 2025 hearing.
That a protection order directed to the DCP South West was passed by the Delhi High Court in WP Crl 437/2018 on 1 June 2023 which was not being implemented or complied with.
That the protection order was reiterated by the Delhi High Court on 28 August 2025 in WPC 11164/2024 and the DCP South West was again directed to ensure compliance in view of the Petitioner's submission that the order was not being complied with.
That a false Status Report under the signature of then DCP South West Manoj C. was filed in October 2023 along with a document described as Police threat assessment report which was a forged and fabricated document.
That the Petitioner filed WPC 13604/2023 seeking an FIR for the forged document filed as Police Threat Assessment report and seeking a proper threat assessment and seeking protection. That notice was issued in this case.
That on 8 May 2024, in Contempt Cases, the Court directed the DCP Special Cell SR to file an affidavit in response to the Petitioner's submissions that the document filed as Police Threat assessment report was a forged document and that no threat assessment had in fact been carried out.
That on 20 July 2024, an affidavit with DCP Amit Kaushik as the alleged Deponent was filed in WPC 13604/2023. That this affidavit also turned out to be forged and it bore a seal which read DCP SR Special Cell instead of the correct designation DCP Special Cell SR. This showed that the seal itself was counterfeit.
The copy of the alleged Police Threat Assessment report filed with this alleged affidavit of Amit Kaushik did not match the copy filed with the Status Report of DCP Manoj C., thereby establishing that both documents were indeed forged.
The Petitioner therefore filed WPC 11618/2024 and WPC 14578/2024 seeking FIRs for filing of a forged affidavit and for the making and use of a counterfeit seal on this affidavit.
The Petitioner on 20 August 2025 had taken the Court through several documents in WPC 14578/2024 and WPC 11618/2024 and had sought the issuance of notice in WPC 14578/2024 for a forged affidavit of then DCP Special Cell SR Amit Kaushik which was filed in WPC 13604/2023 with a fake seal that reads DCP SR Special Cell.
The Court was also at its specific request shown the order pursuant to which this affidavit was filed which was passed in Contempt Cases on 8 May 2024 directing the DCP Special Cell SR to file an affidavit in response to the Petitioner's submissions that the document filed as Police threat assessment report was a forged document and that no threat assessment had in fact been carried out. The Bench was shown the Delhi High Court Order dated 8 May 2024 reproduced in paragraph 13 of WPC 11618/2024.
The Bench was also shown the forged document filed as Police Threat assessment report by DCP Manoj C (Annexure A-2 to WPC 11618/2024).
On 20 August 2025, the Bench was also shown the forged Power of Attorney dated 8 December 2014 that was filed by Nanju Ganpathy in WPC 1280/2012 which is Annexure A-7 to WPC 11618/2024.
The Petitioner also told the Court that the document at Annexure A-8 of WPC 11618/2024 was a forged Section 65B certificate of Google LLC filed by Advocate Mamta Jha in WP Crl 437/2018.
During the hearing on 20 August 2025, the Petitioner spent time showing the last page of the alleged affidavit of DCP Amit Kaushik to the Bench and showed that the seal read DCP SR Special Cell instead of the correct designation DCP Special Cell SR. On this basis, the Petitioner submitted that the seal used on the affidavit was counterfeit.
The Court inquired during the hearing on 20 August 2025 as to what was the expanded form of SR and the Petitioner replied that SR was for Southern Range.
The petitioner wanted to show the court a comparison of the two documents filed as copies of the Police Threat assessment report and how they did not match but the Court insisted there was no time left that day. |
8. After telling the Petitioner that there was no time left, the Bench indicated it was adjourning the cases to 13 October 2025. It was then that the Petitioner requested the Court for a shorter date as she needed urgent protection orders. The Court insisted that as it was a Special Bench and both Judges were preoccupied with their regular rosters, they could not hear the matters before 13 October.
9. It was in response to this issue of urgency, that the petitioner asked the Bench to recuse on 20 August 2025. The Bench refused to recuse. The Petitioner repeated the recusal request two more times. That is all that the Petitioner stated or did. She did not state anything inappropriate. She did not behave in any way inappropriately. At the most the voice of the Petitioner might have displayed her sense of urgency.
10. The Presiding Judge of the Bench suddenly asked the Court Master to call the Police. The Petitioner immediately stopped her submissions and started collecting her belongings and submitted that the Court may proceed as it wanted. Even though there was no need and the Petitioner was not causing any obstruction or insult to the Court and had fallen silent, the Presiding Judge again directed the Court Master to call the Police. A female RAC guard entered the Court room. The Court passed the order which it had already dictated and the Bench rose. The Petitioner requested that the order be uploaded the same day if possible.
11. The order was uploaded only after a couple of days. A copy of the Order dated 20 August 2025 is attached as Annexure P-1.
12. The Petitioner was surprised to find the order completely different from what was dictated in Court. She was also surprised and dismayed that the Order did not correctly record what transpired in Court during the hearing on 20 August 2025.
13. The Petitioner submits that the order has in fact resulted in creating greater danger to her life as it can be used and is being used by persons targeting her to create a false narrative about the Petitioner.
14. The Petitioner has therefore lost faith in the Bench that heard these cases on 20 August 2025. The Petitioner requests that the present Bench recuse from her cases. This is in the interest of justice and is essential to safeguard and protect the life of the Petitioner who is being poisoned and has been repeatedly physically assaulted and who is receiving threats and enduring harassment on a daily basis. The Order dated 20 August 2025 has resulted in the loss of more than six months of precious time. While the Petitioner has been intent on approaching the Supreme Court, she has been targeted, poisoned, been rendered unconscious using anaesthetic gases, been followed, been drugged, been threatened with violence, been harassed including being repeatedly locked inside her premises in Rajokari in these last six months. The life of the Petitioner is in grave danger at this time because she has filed cases for the forged documents that have been filed in Court. This Court ought not to adopt a course of action that will further endanger the Petitioner and cause her further harm.
15. A request for recusal by the present Bench is therefore being made with the hope that it will be accepted.
16. This application is filed in the interest of justice.
PRAYER
It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to allow this Application and:-
1. Pass an order of recusal by Justice Nitin Wasudeo Sambre and Justice Madhu Jain from hearing the cases of the Petitioner Seema Sapra;
2. Pass such other orders and further orders as may be deemed necessary on the facts and in the circumstances of the case.
Filed by
Seema Sapra Petitioner in Person
11 March 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION NO OF 2026
IN
WRIT PETITION CIVIL NO. 12969 OF 2025
IN THE MATTER OF
Seema Sapra … Petitioner
Versus
Amit Goel IPS AGMUT 2014 & Others … Respondents
AFFIDAVIT
I, Seema Sapra, D/o Late A. R. Sapra, aged 54 years presently living on rent in premises in Maa Ganga Vidyalaya Lane, Rajokari 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 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 and that all Annexures are true copies of their respective originals.
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 11th day of March 2026.
DEPONENT
No comments:
Post a Comment