Priya Sachdeva Seeks to Submit Sunjay Kapur’s Asset Details in Sealed Cover Amid Media Leaks

Industrialist Sunjay Kapur’s wife, Priya Sachdeva, approached the Delhi High Court on Thursday, September 25, seeking permission to submit a list of her husband’s personal assets and liabilities in a sealed cover. She cited privacy concerns and alleged that court documents were being leaked to the media, raising serious questions about data confidentiality.

Justice Jyoti Singh, however, did not immediately accept the request. She remarked that disclosure of assets is a necessary part of any partnership-related legal proceedings. The case stems from a partition suit filed by Sunjay Kapur’s second wife and Bollywood actor Karisma Kapoor, along with their two children, who are seeking a share in his properties.

Priya’s counsel, advocate Sheyl Trehan, clarified that her client is not avoiding disclosure but is only requesting confidentiality. “We are willing to share the information with all the parties. But we want it to be in a sealed cover to avoid public leaks,” Trehan told the court. She emphasized the sensitive nature of the information, including bank and DMAT account details, saying that exposing such details poses cyber security risks.

“There’s been excessive media scrutiny. After each hearing, press conferences are held outside the court. Everything is getting leaked. Why should personal bank account numbers be available to the public?” Trehan argued. She added that only two pages of information were being requested to be kept confidential.

However, the plea faced opposition from the counsel representing Karisma Kapoor’s children. The lawyer contended that maintaining confidentiality could hamper their ability to challenge the validity of Sunjay Kapur’s will. They also claimed that funds had already been “wiped off” from his bank accounts — a detail that raises concerns over asset concealment.

Justice Singh supported the concern, pointing out that beneficiaries have the right to scrutinize such financial details. “If they are bound by a confidentiality clause, how will they defend the case?” the judge questioned.

The court adjourned the matter to Friday, September 26, giving Trehan time to propose a solution that balances confidentiality with transparency for all parties involved.