The Delhi High Court was placed on high alert on Friday, September 12, 2025, following a bomb threat received via email. The threat prompted an immediate evacuation of the court premises, including judges, lawyers, and other staff.
The email, sent by one Vijay Sharma to RG Arun Bhardwaj, warned of a blast scheduled to occur in the afternoon. The email ominously referenced recreating "1998 blasts today" in Patna. Upon receiving the threat, most benches suspended court proceedings, and security agencies were promptly deployed to assess the situation and secure the area. The High Court premises were cordoned off as extensive checks got underway.
A senior Delhi Police officer stated that they are investigating the veracity of the threat and have initiated necessary security protocols. Precautionary measures were taken by the Delhi Police, and a search operation is in progress.
This incident follows a series of hoax bomb threats targeting schools and educational institutions in Delhi in recent months. On September 9, 2025, just days before the High Court threat, the Delhi Chief Minister's Secretariat and Maulana Azad Medical College (MAMC) also received bomb threat emails.
The Delhi High Court has previously addressed the issue of bomb threats, particularly those targeting schools. In November 2024, the Court directed the Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi (GNCTD) and Delhi Police to finalize and implement draft action plans and Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) in a time-bound manner. The court also ordered regular mock drills in schools under police supervision to ensure preparedness and assigned specific nodal officers in each zone to oversee bomb threat responses.
In May 2025, the Delhi High Court issued notices to the chief secretary of Delhi and the Delhi Police, after a plea accused the authorities of failing to implement a comprehensive mechanism for handling bomb threats in schools. The court expressed concern over repeated hoax bomb threats and the government's inaction despite earlier directions to form an action plan. The court had given the authorities eight weeks to put this plan in place.
During the May 2025 hearing, Advocate Arpit Bhargava, the petitioner, accused the Delhi government and police of neglecting their duties in responding to the repeated bomb threat emails targeting schools. He pointed out that the eight-week deadline had expired on January 14, 2025, but no action plan or SOP had been provided. Advocate Beenashaw N Soni, representing the petitioner, emphasized that the authorities' failure to act showed a disregard for the Court's orders and demonstrated inefficiency in addressing a matter of public safety.
In response to previous concerns, Delhi Police had revealed the presence of five bomb disposal squads and 18 bomb detection teams for over 4,600 schools in the capital. The court has emphasized the need for better coordination among schools, the police, and municipal authorities to mitigate panic and ensure smooth evacuation processes. The court has also suggested media guidelines to prevent the dissemination of unverified or panic-inducing information during such emergencies.