1984 Sikh riots case: Court defers judgment, allows prosecution to make additional submissions

New Delhi [India], January 21 : The Rouse Avenue Court on Tuesday deferred the judgment in a case against former Congress MP Sajjan Kumar in connection with the Anti-Sikh riots. This case relates to the killing of the father-son duo, Jaswant Singh and his son Tarundeep Singh, in the Saraswati Vihar area on November 1, 1984.
Special Judge Kaveri Baweja allowed Public Prosecutor Manish Rawat to make additional submissions regarding the material collected during the further investigation of the case.
The matter has been deferred until January 31, 2025. Earlier, the court had reserved its judgment.
Advocate Anil Sharma had submitted that Sajjan Kumar's name was not mentioned from the beginning, and that the law of foreign lands is not applicable in this case. He also highlighted the 16-year delay in naming Kumar as the accused. Sharma further noted that a case in which Sajjan Kumar was convicted by the Delhi High Court is still pending before the Supreme Court.
Advocate Sharma also referred to a case cited by senior advocate H.S. Phoolka, submitting that the law of the land would prevail, even in extraordinary situations, and not international law.
In rebuttal, Additional Public Prosecutor Manish Rawat submitted that the accused was not initially known to the victim. When the victim became aware of Sajjan Kumar's identity, she named him in her statement.
Earlier, senior advocate H.S. Phoolka, who appeared for the riot victims, argued that police investigations were manipulated in the Sikh riot cases. "Police investigation was tardy and to save the accused," Phoolka stated.
Phoolka emphasized that the situation during the riots was extraordinary and that these cases should be handled in that context. He referred to the Delhi High Court judgment and submitted that the 1984 riots were not an isolated incident but part of a larger massacre and genocide. He also pointed out that according to official figures, 2,700 Sikhs were killed in Delhi in 1984.
Senior advocate Phoolka cited the Delhi High Court's judgment in the 1984 Delhi Cantt case, where the court referred to the riots as a crime against humanity. He stated that the objective of genocide is always to target minorities. "There is a delay, but the Supreme Court took it seriously, and an SIT was constituted," he argued.
Phoolka also referred to judgments delivered by foreign courts in genocide and crime against humanity cases and mentioned the Geneva Convention.
It was submitted that a charge sheet against Sajjan Kumar had been prepared in 1992 but was never filed in court, suggesting that the police were attempting to protect him.
On November 1, 2023, the court recorded Sajjan Kumar's statement, in which he denied all the charges leveled against him.
Initially, an FIR was registered at the Punjabi Bagh police station. Later, this case was investigated by the Special Investigation Team (SIT) formed following the recommendations of Justice GP Mathur's committee. The committee had recommended the reopening of 114 cases, including this one.
On December 16, 2021, the court framed charges against the accused Sajjan Kumar for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 147/148/149 IPC, as well as offences punishable under Sections 302/308/323/395/397/427/436/440, read with Section 149 IPC.
The SIT alleged that the accused had led the mob and, upon his instigation and abetment, the mob had burned alive the two victims, Jaswant Singh and Tarundeep Singh. The mob also damaged, destroyed, and looted their household articles and property, burned their house, and inflicted severe injuries on the family members and relatives residing in the house.
The SIT claimed that during the investigation, material witnesses were traced and examined, and their statements were recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. The statements of the complainant were recorded on November 23, 2016, during the further investigation. In that statement, she again narrated the incidents of looting, arson, and the murders of her husband and son by the mob armed with deadly weapons. She also clarified that she had seen the photograph of the accused in a magazine about one and a half months later.