scorecardresearch
Monday, March 25, 2024
Support Our Journalism
HomeIndiaGovernanceWhy it took 34 years to convict Sajjan Kumar in 1984 riots...

Why it took 34 years to convict Sajjan Kumar in 1984 riots case

Follow Us :
Text Size:

Earlier this week, Delhi HC set aside a trial court order acquitting Sajjan Kumar and sentenced him to life imprisonment for his role 1984 anti-Sikh riots.

New Delhi: Political patronage enjoyed by some accused, multiple adjournments in hearings and the absence of any witness protection mechanism are among the reasons why it took 34 years for the court to convict Congress leader Sajjan Kumar for his role in the 1984 anti-Sikh riots.

Earlier this week, the Delhi High Court set aside a trial court’s order acquitting Kumar and sentenced him to life imprisonment for the murder of five members of a family in Delhi’s Raj Nagar area on 1 November 1984.

Kumar’s is the first high-profile conviction in the riots that engulfed the national capital in the immediate aftermath of Indira Gandhi’s assassination.

Kumar, a powerful Jat leader, remained largely untouched for close to 25 years. It took the high court five years to adjudicate this matter. Since 2013, the matter had come up before a division bench 119 times. Over the years, 14 high court judges have heard the case.

Adjournments were sought by different parties on several occasions on the grounds of ill-health, outstation visits, the bench not assembling on a given date, among others.

Even Kumar had sought the recusal of a judge in a division bench, but his appeal was dismissed.

One of the worst riots since Partition

In November 1984, anti-Sikh riots broke out in Delhi, hours after two Sikh bodyguards assassinated then Prime Minister India Gandhi.

One of the worst cases of communal violence since Partition in 1947, the massacre in Delhi resulted in 2,733 deaths.

Kumar was convicted in a case pertaining to the murder of five Sikhs in Raj Nagar Part I in southwest Delhi. He has been directed by the Delhi High Court to surrender by 31 December.

In its judgment, the high court division bench noted, “a familiar pattern of mass killings in Mumbai in 1993, in Gujarat in 2002, in Kandhamal, Odisha in 2008, in Muzaffarnagar in UP in 2013 where the minorities were targeted and the attacks were spearheaded by the dominant political actors being facilitated by the law enforcement agencies”.

“As these appeals themselves demonstrate, decades pass by before they can be made answerable. This calls for strengthening the legal system. Neither ‘crimes against humanity’ nor ‘genocide’ is part of our domestic law of crime. This loophole needs to be addressed urgently,” it added.

ThePrint looks at the factors delaying justice for the families affected by the anti-Sikh riots.


Also read: How Sajjan Kumar got away with ‘conspiracy to commit murder’ five years ago


Political patronage

The conviction in the riots came 34 years after the incident. In its judgment, the high court noted that a “majority of the perpetrators of these horrific mass crimes, enjoyed political patronage and were aided by an indifferent law enforcement agency. The criminals escaped prosecution and punishment for over two decades”.

The high court acknowledged “bringing such criminals to justice poses a serious challenge to our legal system”.

In these 34 years, four commissions, nine committees and two SITs have been set up to investigate the riots. Many of the reports have found damning evidence against police officers and senior leaders of the Congress party such as Jagdish Tytler and Sajjan Kumar, cases against whom are still in the courts.

Of the 587 original FIRs registered after the Nanavati Commission took over the probe, only 25 cases have so far resulted in conviction — 12 of these are murder cases. A total of 440 convictions have been made to date, with some people being convicted for as many as seven charges.

In 2015, a Home Ministry-constituted SIT was tasked with re-investigating 187 cases. On 6 December 2017, the SIT closed 186 cases without an investigation. The apex court then decided to set up its own SIT in a hearing on 10 January 2018, which is re-investigating the closed cases.

Nanavati Commission

The case against Kumar was registered in 2005 on the Nanavati Commission’s recommendation. According to the commission’s report, many witnesses spoke of the involvement of Kumar, Balwan Khokar, Pratap Singh, Maha Singh and Mohinder Singh in the riots in areas such as Palam Colony, Tilak Vihar and Raj Nagar.

It was alleged that the mobs indulging in riots were led by Kumar Khokhar and other Congress leaders.

“Police did not even record the complaints of the victims/witnesses against them. Instead, complaints of losses were recorded by the police,” the report said.

“The commission is, therefore, inclined to take the view that there is credible material against Sajjan Kumar and Balwan Khokhar for recording a finding that he and Balwan Khokhar were probably involved as alleged by the witnesses,” it said.

Case in trial court

In 2005, the Justice G.T. Nanavati Commission recommended investigation into Kumar’s role in the riots. However, even as the CBI registered a case against Kumar, the Delhi Police at the time had filed a closure report in this matter.

Five years later, on 13 January 2010, the CBI filed a chargesheet against Kumar accusing him of murdering five Sikhs and burning down a gurdwara. In May, the court framed charges against him, and the trial started in July on a day-to-day basis. Three years later, in April 2013, the trial court acquitted Kumar while convicting five others.

The trial was presided over by three different judges — Sunita Gupta, P.S. Teji and J.R. Aryan.

“Despite being heard on a day-to-day basis, the trial was primarily prolonged because the cross-examination of the three main witnesses took almost a month each,” a lawyer associated with the matter said.

Case in high court

In 2013, the CBI filed an appeal in the high court challenging the trial court’s acquittal of Kumar. Since 2013, matter had come up before a division bench 119 times.

Justice Pratibha Rani of Delhi HC had heard the matter for the first time on 27 May 2013. Later, Justices S.P Garg, Veena Birbal, G.S. Sistani, G.P. Mittal, J.R Midha, Sanjiv Khanna, R.K. Gauba, Gita Mittal, P.S. Teji, Anu Malhotra, I.S. Mehta, S. Muralidhar, and Vinod Goel heard the case.

The case came up eight times in 2013, the last being heard in October. It was listed for hearing again in July 2015. The case was heard four times that year.

In November 2016, the high court had dismissed a plea filed by Kumar seeking the recusal of Justice Teji. Kumar had submitted that as an additional sessions judge in Karkardooma, Justice Teji had refused to grant him anticipatory bail in 2010.

The case gathered steam between 2016 and 2018, until Justice Mittal’s elevation as Chief Justice of Jammu and Kashmir high court. Finally, the division bench of Justices Muralidhar and Goel delivered the judgment within two months of reserving it.


Also read: The 4 who never gave up the fight, and succeeded in putting Sajjan Kumar in jail


Absence of witness protection mechanism

During arguments in the high court, defence lawyer H.S. Phoolka submitted that witness protection was absolutely essential and the failure to provide this was the main reason for the delay in witnesses coming forward to speak the truth.

Other cases against Kumar

There are at least five other cases against Kumar, including the one filed by the CBI in Sultanpuri. The complainant, Anwar Kaur, alleged that Kumar had instigated a crowd that lynched her husband Navin Singh.

On 23 October 2002, a trial court had acquitted Kumar on the grounds that the evidence failed miserably to prove his involvement in the incident. The CBI took five years to appeal against this acquittal in the high court. In January 2010, the matter was shifted to the regular matter category and was last listed in February 2010.

There is another case lodged against Kumar, in which hearing has been on at the Patiala House District court since 2005. It took the court five years to frame charges against Kumar. The delay could be on account of an appeal filed by Kumar in the high court against these charges. In 2013, the high court dismissed Kumar’s plea and ordered him to face trial.

However, the CBI has not yet concluded recording the witness’ statements even after five years. Only one of the 17 witnesses listed by them has deposed. The second is slated to depose Thursday.

Apart from these cases, the Home Ministry-constituted SIT has filed two FIRs against Kumar. The SIT had sought the cancellation of the bail granted to Kumar by the high court in 2016. However, the court upheld its order, and now an appeal is pending before the Supreme Court.

Subscribe to our channels on YouTube, Telegram & WhatsApp

Support Our Journalism

India needs fair, non-hyphenated and questioning journalism, packed with on-ground reporting. ThePrint – with exceptional reporters, columnists and editors – is doing just that.

Sustaining this needs support from wonderful readers like you.

Whether you live in India or overseas, you can take a paid subscription by clicking here.

Support Our Journalism

1 COMMENT

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Most Popular