1984 Anti-Sikh Riots: Delhi Court Delays Verdict in Sajjan Kumar Murder Case

Click to start listening
1984 Anti-Sikh Riots: Delhi Court Delays Verdict in Sajjan Kumar Murder Case

Synopsis

On February 7, a Delhi court postponed the verdict in the murder case against former Congress MP Sajjan Kumar, linked to the 1984 anti-Sikh riots, until February 12. The case involves the murders of Jaswant Singh and his son Tarundeep Singh during the riots.

Key Takeaways

  • Sajjan Kumar's trial linked to the 1984 riots.
  • The court decision is now set for February 12.
  • Arguments presented on delayed identification of the accused.
  • Significant implications for victims' rights and justice.
  • Case involves broader questions of police investigations.

New Delhi, Feb 7 (NationPress) A Delhi court has postponed the announcement of its ruling in the murder trial of former Congress MP Sajjan Kumar, connected to the 1984 anti-Sikh riots, until February 12. This case pertains to the tragic deaths of a father-son duo in the Saraswati Vihar locality on November 1, 1984.

Special judge Kaveri Baweja, who was expected to deliver the verdict on Friday, has now rescheduled it for February 12.

Previously, on January 31, the Rouse Avenue Court had reserved its judgment after considering additional submissions made by Public Prosecutor Manish Rawat.

The case involves the murders of Jaswant Singh and his son Tarundeep Singh in the Saraswati Vihar area amid the riots.

Meanwhile, advocate Anil Sharma argued that Sajjan Kumar's name was not included initially and that there was a 16-year delay in identifying him as a suspect by the eyewitness. He also pointed out that a case in which Sajjan Kumar was previously convicted by the Delhi High Court is currently under appeal in the Supreme Court.

In response, Additional Public Prosecutor Rawat contended that the victim did not recognize the accused initially. It was only upon realizing who Sajjan Kumar was that she included him in her statement.

Additionally, senior advocate H.S. Phoolka, representing the victims of the riots, claimed that the police investigations into the cases involving the Sikh riots were compromised. He stated that the investigations were sluggish and aimed at protecting the accused. He emphasized that the extraordinary circumstances during the riots necessitated a unique approach to these cases.

During his arguments, Phoolka cited the Delhi High Court's judgment and asserted that this case is not isolated but part of a larger massacre. He highlighted that official records indicate that 2,700 Sikhs lost their lives in Delhi during the 1984 riots.

Phoolka also referenced the Delhi High Court's verdict in the 1984 anti-Sikh riot case in Delhi Cantt, where the court characterized the riots as a “crime against humanity”.

Initially, a First Information Report (FIR) was filed at the Punjabi Bagh police station. Subsequently, the case was taken over by the Special Investigation Team (SIT) formed based on the recommendations of the Justice G.P. Mathur Committee, which led to the filing of a charge sheet.

The Justice Mathur committee had advocated for the reopening of 114 cases, including this one. On December 16, 2021, the court charged Sajjan Kumar with multiple offenses under sections 147, 148, and 149 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), along with charges under sections 302, 308, 323, 395, 397, 427, 436, and 440 in conjunction with section 149 IPC.

The SIT has alleged that the accused led the mob that, under his incitement and support, brutally killed the two individuals, ravaged their belongings, torched their home, and inflicted serious injuries on family members and relatives present in the residence. During the investigation, crucial witnesses were identified, examined, and their testimonies recorded under section 161 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC).

The complainant's testimony was recorded on November 23, 2016, during further investigations, where she recounted the horrifying incidents of looting, arson, and the murders of her husband and son by the armed mob. She also detailed the injuries sustained by her and other victims, including her sister-in-law, who later succumbed to her injuries.

She clarified that she recognized the accused's photograph in a magazine approximately a month and a half after the incident.