CRIMINAL
APPELLATE JURISDICTION
I.A.
NO. 165983 OF 2019
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1238 OF 2019
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1238 OF 2019
IN THE MATTER OF
SEEMA SAPRA …Appellant/Petitioner
Versus
COURT ON ITS OWN MOTION … Respondent
APPLICATION FOR CLARIFICATION/ RECTIFICATION
OF ORDER DATED 14 AUGUST 2019 WITH RESPECT TO OBSERVATIONS ON IA 300030/2018 AND
AN INCORRECT STATEMENT OF FACT IN PARAGRAPH 25 OF THE ORDER
To
Hon'ble The Chief Justice of India and His Companion Judges of the
Supreme Court of India., the application of the Appellant/ Petitioner most
respectfully showeth:-
1.
The present appeal has been admitted and the operation of the impugned
order stayed by this Hon’ble Court on 14 August 2019, by a common order passed
in Criminal Appeal Diary No. 10342/2019 and in Writ Petition Civil 13/2018 and
Writ Petition Civil 1027/2018.
2.
The Appellant had filed IA No. 30030/2018 in the present appeal on 24
February 2018 and sought the following relief:
|
PRAYER
It is,
therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be
pleased to allow this Application and:-
(i) To recall its order dated 7 February
2018 appointing Senior Advocate Mr Vikas Singh as amicus in this matter;
(ii) Record/ clarify that the appellant has
not consented to the appointment of Mr Vikas Singh as amicus in this matter,
and that the appellant strongly objects to this appointment;
(iii) Record the appellant’s submission that she
objects to any lawyer or amicus being appointed or being asked to present her
case or submissions in this appeal or to report to this Hon’ble Court on the
appellant’s circumstances, or to represent the appellant or her case in this
appeal in any manner or to appear for her or to speak on her behalf or in her
absence in this case;
(iv) Issue formal notice as per rules, protocol
and practice in suo moto contempt matters to the office of the Attorney
General of India;
(v) Grant the appellant, a qualified lawyer,
a full and fair hearing in this matter as appellant in person, in accordance
with the principles of natural justice and due process guaranteed under
Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India;
(vi) To
pass such other orders and further orders as may be deemed necessary on the
facts and in the circumstances of the case.
|
3.
IA 30030/2018 was heard by a three Judge Bench of this Hon’ble Court on
26 March 2018 when the following order was passed.
|
ITEM NO.35
COURT NO.5 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 No(s). D 10342/2016
SEEMA SAPRA
Appellant(s)
VERSUS
COURT ON
ITS OWN MOTION Respondent(s)
(IA
No.122625/2017-SUMMONING ORIGINAL RECORD and
IA
No.123144/2017-APPLICATION SEEKING DIRECTIONS FOR HEARING BY A
FIVE JUDGE
CONSTITUTION BENCH AND IA No.127773/2017-APPROPRIATE
ORDERS/DIRECTIONS
AND IA No.128666/2017-CONDONATION OF DELAY IN
FILING
APPEAL AND IA No.30030/2018-RECALLING THE COURTS ORDER)
Date :
26-03-2018 These matters were called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KURIAN JOSEPH
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAN M. SHANTANAGOUDAR
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN SINHA
Amicus
Curiae Mr. Vikas Singh, Sr. Advocate (N.P.)
For
Appellant(s) Petitioner-in-person
For
Respondent(s)
The Court made the following
O R D E R
Issue
notice on the applications as well as on the appeal, returnable on
13.07.2018.
The
Registry is directed to issue notice also to the Attorney General for India.
(NARENDRA
PRASAD) (RENU DIWAN)
COURT MASTER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
|
4.
IA 30030/2018 was listed before a
Division Bench of this Hon’ble Court on 30 July 2018 when the following order
was passed.
|
ITEM NO.27
COURT NO.6 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 No. 10342/2016
SEEMA SAPRA
Appellant(s)
VERSUS
COURT ON
ITS OWN MOTION Respondent(s)
(WITH
APPLN.(S) FOR SEEKING DIRECTIONS FOR HEARING BY A FIVE
JUDGE
CONSTITUTION BENCH, APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS,
CONDONATION
OF DELAY IN FILING APPEAL, RECALLING THE COURT'S
ORDER,
SUMMONING ORIGINAL RECORD)
Date :
30-07-2018 This matter was called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.A. BOBDE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE L. NAGESWARA RAO
Mr. Vikas
Singh, Sr. Adv. (A.C.)
For
Appellant(s) Ms. Seema Sapre, In-person
For
Respondent(s) Mr. Annam D. N. Rao, AOR
Mr. A. Venkatesh, Adv.
Ms. Sudipta
Sircar, Adv.
Mr. Rahul
Mishra, Adv.
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the
following
O R D E R
Mr. Vikas
Singh, learned senior counsel
(Amicus
Curiae) is discharged from the case.
List the
matter before the Bench of which, one
of us (L.
Nageswara Rao, J.) is not a member next
week.
Liberty is
granted to the petitioner, who
appears
in-person to mention the matter before
Hon'ble the
Chief Justice of India.
[
Charanjeet Kaur ] [ Indu Kumari Pokhriyal ]
A.R.-cum-P.S. Asstt. Registrar9999
|
5.
IA No. 30030/2018 has been disposed
off by this Hon’ble Court’s order dated 14 August 2019 with the following
observations:
|
14. By this application, appellant has prayed
that the order dated 7th February, 2018 appointing Senior Advocate Mr. Vikas Singh
be recalled. That prayer has been granted in terms of order dated 30th July,
2018 passed by the Court. The other relief claimed in the application is to
issue notice to the office of the Attorney General for India, which is
similar to one made in another application filed by the appellant. As the
criminal appeal has been admitted, the Registry shall proceed in the matter
as per the Rules. Hence, no further orders are required in that regard.
15. The
appellant has then prayed for giving a qualified lawyer; to give appellant a
full and fair hearing in the matter. The record shows that fair hearing has
been given to the appellant thus far; and it would be extended even after
admission of the appeal. No formal order is required in that regard.
16.
Accordingly, the application under consideration is disposed of.
|
6.
As correctly noted in the order dated
14 August 2019, the prayer seeking recall of the order appointing Mr Vikas
Singh as amicus in this matter has already been granted.
7.
However, with respect to prayer no.
(iv) made in IA 30030/2018 seeking issuance of notice to the Attorney General,
the order dated 14 August 2019 overlooks that this prayer has also already been
granted by the order dated 26 March 2018. Instead of noting that notice to the
Attorney General has already been issued on 26 March 2018, the order dated 14
August 2019 has proceeded to direct the Registry to proceed in the matter as
per the Rules as the appeal has been admitted. It is respectfully submitted
that this Hon’ble Court has already issued notice to the Attorney General in
this matter on 26 March 2018 and that therefore the direction to the Registry
in the order dated 14 August 2019 on this point is superfluous and ambiguous
and will only further confuse the Registry. It is therefore requested that this
Hon’ble Court clarify that notice to the Attorney
General has already been issued in this matter by the Hon’ble Supreme Court on
26 March 2018.
8.
The Appellant had also made the following
prayer to this Hon’ble Court in IA 30030/2018 which has been overlooked by this
Hon’ble Court.
9.
This prayer is very crucial and
important to the Appellant as it directly impacts upon the existing threat to
the life of the Appellant. The Appellant has pointed out in detail in both IA
111244/2017 and 30030/2018 how in view of the threat to her life, the
appointment of an amicus in this matter, or any kind of proceeding/ order
permitting someone else or any lawyer to speak on behalf of the Appellant or to
represent her or her interests will further endanger the life of the appellant
and be used to cover up the threat to her life, the physical harm being caused
to her and to misrepresent to the Hon’ble Court the circumstances of the
appellant. It would create a situation and incentive for the Appellant to be
harmed enough in order to prevent her from attending court and then using such
amicus/ lawyer and his reliance on hearsay or on lies by the Police to
misrepresent the true situation of the Appellant.
10.
It is therefore prayed that this
Hon’ble Court record the appellant’s submission that she objects to any lawyer
or amicus being appointed or being asked to present her case or submissions in
this appeal or to report to this Hon’ble Court on the appellant’s
circumstances, or to represent the appellant or her case in this appeal in any
manner or to appear for her or to speak on her behalf or in her absence in this
case.
11.
In IA 30030/2018, the Appellant had
also sought the following relief:
|
(v) Grant the appellant, a qualified lawyer, a full and fair
hearing in this matter as appellant in person, in accordance with the
principles of natural justice and due process guaranteed under Articles 14
and 21 of the Constitution of India;
|
12.
It is submitted that the following statement
in order dated 14 August 2019 completely mis-records and misquotes the
Appellant’s prayer clause (v) in IA 30030/2018 thereby completely changing its
very meaning and that the misquotation/ paraphrase of the said prayer clause
(v) means the exact opposite of what the Appellant actually prayed for in IA
30030/2018. This is a very serious error in the order dated 14 August 2019 and
it places the life of the Appellant at risk.
|
The appellant has then prayed for giving a
qualified lawyer; to give appellant a full and fair hearing in the matter. The record
shows that fair hearing has been given to the appellant thus far; and it
would be extended even after admission of the appeal. No formal order is
required in that regard.
|
13.
The Appellant submits that she has
not been given a full and fair hearing by this Hon’ble Court on 29/3/2019,
11/4/2019, 12/7/2019 and 14 /8/2019, and this is evident from the fact that the
order and judgment dated 14 August 2019 contains so many errors and incorrect
statements of fact apparent on the face of the record. However, the present
application is not on this larger grievance.
14.
In this application the Appellant
wants to point out that the prayer clause (v) of the Appellant in IA 30030/2018
stated “Grant the appellant, a qualified lawyer, a full and fair hearing in
this matter as appellant in person, …” and this has been misquoted/ incorrectly
paraphrased in the order dated 14 August 2019 as “The
appellant has then prayed for giving a qualified lawyer; to give appellant a
full and fair hearing in the matter.”
15.
The effect of this misquoting/
incorrect paraphrasing of prayer (v) of IA 30030/2018 in the order dated 14
August 2019 results in a complete misrepresentation of the Petitioner’s prayer
and submission that no lawyer be allowed to represent her. Instead paragraph 15
of Order dated 14 August 2019 incorrectly suggests that the Appellant has asked
the Court to appoint a qualified lawyer for her. In fact, the sole purpose of
IA 30030/2018 as evident from its complete prayer clause was to convey the
Appellant’s categorical and unambiguous objection to any lawyer/ amicus being
appointed to represent the Appellant or her case, to present the case of the
Appellant, to speak on behalf of the Appellant or to appear in this case in the
absence of the Appellant or to speak about the circumstances of the
Appellant.
16.
This misquoting of the Appellant’s
prayer clause (v) of IA 30030/2018 in the order dated 14 August 2019 is also
completely contrary to prayer clause (iii) of IA 30030/2018 where the Appellant
requested the Hon’ble Court to record “the appellant’s submission that she
objects to any lawyer or amicus being appointed or being asked to present her
case or submissions in this appeal or to report to this Hon’ble Court on the
appellant’s circumstances, or to represent the appellant or her case in this
appeal in any manner or to appear for her or to speak on her behalf or in her
absence in this case”.
17.
The Appellant has already been
poisoned repeatedly with extremely poisonous chemicals and acidic substances
after the order dated 14 August 2019 was passed and at present she is unable to
breathe properly and has most likely developed chemical pneumonia. The
Appellant has filed applications in this present matter on 16 August 2019 (IA
123155/2019), on 17 August 2019 (IA 123155/2019), on 21 September 2019 (IA No.
146620/2019) and on 27 September 2019 (IA 150945/2019) and is still waiting as
of 23 October 2019 for these to be listed in Court. The Appellant is sleeping
in a tent in Lodhi Gardens. She is being poisoned there. She is being followed
and stalked and being targeted with noxious chemical fumes and vapors in a near
continuous assault on her lungs which has caused considerable acute and
long-term damage and left her unable to breathe properly.
18.
The Appellant therefore requests that
the following statement appearing in order dated 14
August 2019 - “The appellant has then prayed for giving a qualified lawyer; to
give appellant a full and fair hearing in the matter” - be expunged from the order dated 14 August
2019 as it misrepresents/ incorrectly paraphrases the actual prayer of the
Appellant as set out in prayer clause (v) of IA 30030/2018 and it conveys the
exact opposite of what the Appellant set out in the said prayer clause (v).
19.
The Appellant requests that the Hon’ble
Court modify paragraph 15 of its order dated 14 August 2019 and that the
Hon’ble Court correctly record the prayer of the Appellant in clause (v) of IA 30030/2018 which reads as follows:
|
(v) Grant
the appellant, a qualified lawyer, a full and fair hearing in this matter as
appellant in person, in accordance with the principles of natural justice and
due process guaranteed under Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India;
|
20.
What causes the Appellant even more
concern is that the report published by the Bar and Bench legal news website on
the order dated 14 August 2019 deliberately misreported that this Hon’ble Court
had appointed Ms. Pinky Anand as amicus in this matter. This is a completely
false and mischievous report published by Bar and Bench at the behest of some
powerful lawyers including Soli Sorabjee and Raian Karanjawala. The facts are
as follows. Ms Pinky Anand had been appointed amicus in this matter on 27
October 2017 and that order was recalled on 4 December 2017 after the Appellant
filed IA 111244/2017 expressly seeking recall of that order. The Appellant had
pointed out in IA 111244/2017 that Ms Pinky Anand was a close friend of Mr Soli
Sorabjee, Mr Raian Karanjawala and of the group of lawyers targeting the
Appellant including Mr Mukul Rohatgi and the late Mr Arun Jaitley. The
Appellant had in IA 111244/2017 pointed out how Ms Pinky Anand had participated
in targeting the Appellant herself and her hostile conduct and behaviour toward
the Appellant on 27 October 2017. The Appellant further wants to state on the
record that Ms Pinky Anand is part of the large group of lawyers targeting the
Appellant and has been using her staff and junior lawyers to target and poison
the Appellant with pesticides and noxious chemicals on the premises of the Delhi
High court and the Supreme Court, Complaints in writing have been made by the
Appellant in this regard.
21.
The Appellant relies upon the
contents of both IA 111244/2017 and IA 30030/2018 and seeks leave to refer to
those during the hearing of the present application.
22.
The Appellant submits that no hearing
took place before this Hon’ble Court on IA 30030/2018 before the order dated 14
August 2019 was passed. The Appellant was not afforded any opportunity to make
submissions on IA 30030/2018.
23.
The present application is being made
in the interest of justice.
24.
The Appellant is a qualified lawyer
enrolled with the Bar Council of Delhi. Both the Delhi High Court Bar and the
Supreme Court Bar are extremely hostile to her because of her whistleblower
corruption complaints against General Electric Company which have exposed many
lawyers and her complaints of sexual harassment and sexual assault against Soli
Sorabjee and Raian Karanjawala. The Appellant has been complaining that the Bar
and large groups of lawyers acting in concert are being used to target, stalk
and poison the Appellant with pesticides and poisonous, noxious chemicals including
on court premises. Members of the Bar are also being used to degrade, humiliate
and dehumanize the Appellant. They are further being used to harass, threaten
and to smear the Appellant. Both the Delhi High Court Bar Association and the
current President of the Supreme Court Bar Association (Mr Rakesh Khanna) have
asked that the Appellant be prevented from using Bar facilities and Mr Rakesh
Khanna has gone so far as to ask the Supreme Court Secretary General to
restrict the appellants entry into Supreme Court premises. The Appellant has
responded in writing to these patently illegal, malafide, malicious and
criminal actions of the DHCBA executive committee and of Mr Rakesh Khanna
(apparently he acted alone) to the Registrar General of the Delhi High Court
and the Secretary General of the Supreme Court. The Appellant will be moving an
application seeking leave to place these documents on record before this
Hon’ble Court. This is further reason why the above-discussed misquotation of
the Appellants prayer places her at risk as the threat to her life emanates
also from very powerful members of the Bar.
25.
The Appellant is being poisoned. Her
life is in grave danger.
26.
It is pointed out that in its common
order dated 14 August 2019 passed in the present appeal and in Writ Petition
Civil No. 13/2018 and Writ Petition Civil 1027/2018, this Hon’ble Court has
assumed an incorrect fact and proceeded on that basis. By virtue of order dated
14 August 2019, both Writ Petition Civil 13/2018 and Writ Petition Civil
1027/2018 have been disposed off without being heard or decided on merits only
because the Hon’ble Court notes that the Petitioner in those writ petitions
(who is the Appellant here, Ms Seema Sapra) has filed a petition in the Delhi
High Court for similar relief. With great respect, it is pointed out that this
assumption of fact by this Hon’ble Court in its order dated 14 August 2019 is
completely incorrect. Ms Seema Sapra has not filed any other petition in the
Delhi High Court and had elected to enforce her fundamental rights under Article
32 in Writ Petition Civil 13/2018 and Writ Petition Civil 1027/2018. The
Appellant again unambiguously states that she has not filed a petition in the
Delhi High Court for the relief sought in Writ Petition Civil 13/2018 and Writ
Petition Civil 1027/2018.
27.
In paragraph
25 of the order dated 14 August 2019, it is stated that “During the course of
hearing, we were informed by the petitioner that she has filed a writ petition
in the Delhi High Court.” As already clarified this statement is incorrect.
Ms Seema Sapra had and has not filed any writ petition in the Delhi High Court
at all.
28.
It is therefore prayed that this statement in paragraph 25 of the order dated 14 August
2019 (“During the course of hearing, we were informed by the petitioner that
she has filed a writ petition in the Delhi High Court.”) be removed from the
order/ be expunged and the record be corrected to accurately reflect that Ms
Seema Sapra had not filed any writ petition in the Delhi High Court, This
clarification/ correction of the order is important because this incorrect fact
ought not to have been the reason for this Hon’ble Court to dispose off Writ
Petition Civil 13/2018 and Writ Petition Civil 1027/ 2018 without hearing or
disposal on merits. As a result of this error by the Hon’ble Court, the
Appellant (Ms Seema Sapra) has been poisoned repeatedly since 14 August 2019
with acidic and corrosive chemicals, pesticides, organophosphates and other
noxious chemicals. She has chemical burns and blisters inside her mouth, in the
last one month, the enamel of her teeth has eroded because of exposure to
acidic inhalants. She is unable to breathe properly. And she has no place to
sleep and is being compelled to get some sleep in a tent in Lodhi Gardens where
she is being poisoned by persons approaching her tent, being harassed, stalked,
intimidated, attacked and threatened. The Police is being used to stalk,
target, harass and poison the Appellant with very senior police officers
involved. The Police is complicit in the
poisoning of the Appellant and is being used to hunt down the Appellant like
prey.
PRAYER
It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may
graciously be pleased to allow this Application and:-
(i)
Clarify and record that notice to the Attorney General has already been
issued in this matter by the Hon’ble Supreme Court on 26 March 2018 and that
the Court Registry has already served the Attorney General with this notice and
copy of the paper book;
(ii)
Record the appellant’s submission that she objects to any lawyer or
amicus being appointed or being asked to present her case or submissions in
this appeal or to report to this Hon’ble Court on the appellant’s
circumstances, or to represent the appellant or her case in this appeal in any
manner or to appear for her or to speak on her behalf or in her absence in this
case;
(iii)
Expunge the following statement appearing in order dated 14 August 2019
- “The appellant has then prayed for giving a qualified lawyer; to give
appellant a full and fair hearing in the matter” as this misrepresents/ misquotes prayer
clause (v) of IA30030/2018 which read “Grant
the appellant, a qualified lawyer, a full and fair hearing in this matter as
appellant in person, in accordance with the principles of natural justice and
due process guaranteed under Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India”;
(iv)
Record that the Appellant a qualified lawyer is appearing in person and
arguing in person and that she strongly objects to any amicus or other lawyer
representing her or speaking on her behalf or her interests in this matter and
that she has not asked to be given a court-appointed lawyer and she has the
strongest objection to any court-appointed lawyer representing her;
(v)
Modify paragraph 15 of the order dated 14 August 2019 and correctly
record the prayer of the Appellant in clause (v) of IA 30030/2018 which reads
“Grant the appellant, a qualified lawyer, a full and fair hearing in this
matter as appellant in person, in accordance with the principles of natural
justice and due process guaranteed under Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution
of India”;
(vi)
Modify/ correct paragraph 25 of the order dated 14 August 2019 where it
has been incorrectly noted that “During the course of hearing, we were informed
by the petitioner that she has filed a writ petition in the Delhi High Court”,
and remove/ expunge this incorrect statement of fact from the order so that the
record accurately reflect that Ms Seema Sapra had not filed any writ petition
in the Delhi High Court,
(vii)
To pass such other orders and further orders as may be deemed necessary
on the facts and in the circumstances of the case.
FOR WHICH ACT OF KINDNESS, THE APPELLANT/ PETITIONER SHALL AS IN DUTY
BOUND, EVER PRAY.
FILED BY:
SEEMA SAPRA
APPELLANT/PETITIONER-IN-PERSON
DRAWN ON: 25/10/2019
FILED ON: 25/10/2019
IN THE
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL
APPELLATE JURISDICTION
I.A. NO. OF 2019
IN
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1238 OF 2019
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1238 OF 2019
IN THE MATTER OF
SEE*MA SAPRA …Appellant/Petitioner
Versus
COURT ON ITS OWN MOTION … Respondent
AFFIDAVIT
I, Seema Sapra, aged 48 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 Appellant/ 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
seeking modification/ rectification of order dated 14
August 2019 in relation to observations made with respect to IA 30030/2018 and
paragraph 25 of the order 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 25th day of October 2019.
DEPONENT
No comments:
Post a Comment