Judgement Expected Today for Sajjan Kumar in 1984 Anti-Sikh Riots Case
Click to start listening
Synopsis
A Delhi court is set to announce its decision regarding Sajjan Kumar in the 1984 anti-Sikh riots case, linked to the tragic deaths of a father and son. The case has generated significant attention and controversy surrounding the investigations and legal proceedings.
Key Takeaways
- Judgement on Sajjan Kumar's case expected today.
- Case involves the murder of two individuals in 1984 riots.
- Arguments presented regarding police investigation integrity.
- Senior Advocate H.S. Phoolka represents riot victims.
- High Court termed the riots a crime against humanity.
New Delhi, Feb 7 (NationPress) A Delhi court is poised to deliver its decision today regarding the 1984 anti-Sikh riots case involving former Congress MP Sajjan Kumar.
The case pertains to the tragic murder of a father-son pair in the Saraswati Vihar region on November 1, 1984.
Special Judge Kaveri Baweja is slated to announce the verdict today.
On January 31, the court reserved the ruling following additional submissions by Public Prosecutor Manish Rawat.
This case is connected to the deaths of Jaswant Singh and his son, Tarundeep Singh, in the Saraswati Vihar locality on November 1, 1984.
Advocate Anil Sharma argued that Sajjan Kumar's name was absent from the onset, asserting that foreign law does not apply in this instance and pointing out a 16-year delay in the witness naming Kumar.
Furthermore, it was noted that a previous conviction of Sajjan Kumar by the Delhi High Court is currently under appeal at the Supreme Court.
Advocate Sharma also referenced a case cited by Senior Advocate H.S. Phoolka.
He contended that domestic law should take precedence even in unusual circumstances, rejecting the applicability of international law.
In rebuttal, Additional Public Prosecutor Manish Rawat claimed that the victim was unaware of Kumar's identity initially, and only named him after recognizing him later.
Previously, Senior Advocate H.S. Phoolka represented riot victims and argued that police investigations were compromised during the Sikh riots. He emphasized that the police inquiries were sluggish and aimed at protecting the accused.
It was posited that the extraordinary nature of the riots necessitated a different approach to these cases.
During his arguments, Senior Advocate Phoolka cited the Delhi High Court judgement, asserting that this incident was not an isolated occurrence but part of a larger massacre, qualifying it as genocide.
Official statistics indicate that approximately 2,700 Sikhs lost their lives in the 1984 violence in Delhi.
Senior Advocate Phoolka referenced a judgement from the Delhi High Court regarding the 1984 anti-Sikh riots, where the court termed the violence a “crime against humanity”. He argued that genocide targets minority groups.
He remarked, “There is a delay. The Supreme Court recognized this delay, prompting the formation of a Special Investigation Team (SIT).”
Phoolka also brought up international court rulings concerning genocide and crimes against humanity, in addition to referencing the Geneva Convention.
It was disclosed that a charge sheet against Sajjan Kumar was prepared in 1992 but remained unfiled, suggesting police efforts to shield him.
On November 1, 2023, Sajjan Kumar provided his statement, denying all accusations against him.
Initially, an FIR was lodged at the Punjabi Bagh police station. Subsequently, this case was examined by a Special Investigation Team established on the recommendations of the Justice G P Mathur committee, which also filed a charge sheet.
The committee had advocated for the reopening of 114 cases, including this one.
On December 16, 2021, the court established charges against Sajjan Kumar for numerous offences under the Indian Penal Code (IPC), including sections 147, 148, and 149, as well as sections 302, 308, 323, 395, 397, 427, 436, and 440 in conjunction with section 149 IPC.
The SIT has alleged that Kumar led the mob that, upon his incitement and encouragement, brutally murdered the aforementioned individuals, while also destroying, looting, and setting their property ablaze, inflicting serious injuries on family members and relatives present.
During the inquiry, crucial witnesses were located, their statements recorded under section 161 CrPC.
On November 23, 2016, the complainant's testimony was documented during further investigation, detailing the looting and arson, along with the murders of her husband and son by the armed mob, and revealing injuries sustained by her and other victims, including a sister-in-law who later passed away.
The complainant clarified that she recognized the accused from a photograph in a magazine about one and a half months later.
