Welcome to SPN

Register and Join the most happening forum of Sikh community & intellectuals from around the world.

Sign Up Now!
  1.   Become a Supporter    ::   Make a Contribution   
    Target (Recurring Monthly): $200 :: Achieved: $98

1984 1984 anti-Sikh riots: Sajjan Kumar, others conclude final arguments

Discussion in 'History of Sikhism' started by spnadmin, Feb 5, 2013.

  1. spnadmin

    spnadmin United States
    Expand Collapse
    1947-2014 (Archived)
    SPNer Supporter

    Jun 17, 2004
    Likes Received:
    1984 anti-Sikh riots: Sajjan Kumar, others conclude final arguments


    New Delhi: Congress leader Sajjan Kumar and five others, facing trial in a 1984 anti-Sikh riots case, on Monday concluded their final arguments in a Delhi court, where they questioned the conduct of the complainant and key witness and accused her of often changing her stand.

    CBI had commenced final arguments in the case on March 31, last year.

    The Delhi High Court in February 2010 had ordered quick disposal of all pending 1984 anti-Sikh riots cases, including that of Congress leaders Sajjan Kumar and Jagdish Tytler, and had said that they should be concluded within six months in the lower courts.

    Concluding the arguments, advocate Anil Sharma, appearing for Sajjan and other accused, told District Judge J R Aryan that "as the case does not stand on its fact, it cannot succeed on law point also".

    The counsel questioned the conduct of complainant and key witness Jagdish Kaur, who had lost lives of her family members during the riots in 1984.

    He argued that Jagdish Kaur in her statements to judicial commissions, set up to probe riot related cases, had said she did not take the name of Sajjan Kumar earlier as she was "scared and the situation was anti-Sikh" that time.

    "Whereas, during cross examination before the trial court, she had said when she gave her affidavit to the commissions, she was not scared and was not concealing anything. She had also said that she had taken Sajjan Kumar's name before the Delhi Police but it did not record it. This shows she had changed her stand in the court," the counsel said.

    The court has fixed February 19 for CBI to rebut the arguments advanced by the defence.

    Sajjan Kumar is facing trial along with five others - Balwan Khokkar, Kishan Khokkar, Mahender Yadav, Girdhari Lal and Captain Bhagmal - for allegedly inciting a mob against the Sikh community in Delhi Cantonment area.

    The case relates to anti-Sikh riots that had broken out after the assassination of the then Prime Minister Indira Gandhi on October 31, 1984.

    Sharma argued that Jagdish Kaur had not taken the names of accused Balwan Khokkar, Mahender Yadav and Captain Bhagmal in her earlier statements and there was no evidence against them.

    "Before Ranganath Mishra Commission, Jagdish Kaur had said that Balwan Khokkar was leading the mob which killed her family members during the riots. In Nanavati Commission, she had said that Sajjan Kumar was leading the mob while in court, she said that Balwan was a part of mob and did not mention the name of Sajjan Kumar," he said.

    The counsel also contended that there were several other contradictions in the statements of the witnesses.

    The Delhi police had earlier probed the riots cases and the investigation was handed over to CBI in 2005.

    CBI had earlier told the court that there was a conspiracy of "terrifying proportion" between Kumar and the police during the riots.

    It had said the police had acted in a pre-planned manner during the riots and kept its "eyes closed" to the wide-spread violence.

    The case against Sajjan Kumar was registered in 2005 on a recommendation by Justice G T Nanavati Commission. CBI had filed two charge sheets against him and the other accused in January 2010.

    The trial court had framed charges against Sajjan Kumar and the five others under Sections 302 (murder), 395 (dacoity), 427 (mischief to cause damage to property), 153-A (promoting enmity between different communities) and other provisions of the IPC.

    • Like Like x 1
  2. Loading...

Since you're here... we have a small favor to ask...

More people are visiting & reading SPN than ever but far fewer are paying to sustain it. Advertising revenues across the online media have fallen fast. So you can see why we need to ask for your help. Donating to SPN's is vote for free speech, for diversity of opinions, for the right of the people to stand up to religious bigotry. Without any affiliation to any organization, this constant struggle takes a lot of hard work to sustain as we entirely depend on the contributions of our esteemed writers/readers. We do it because we believe our perspective matters – because it might well be your perspective, too... Fund our efforts and together we can keep the world informed about the real Sikh Sikhi Sikhism. If everyone who writes or reads our content, who likes it, helps us to pay for it, our future would be much more secure. Every Contribution Matters, Contribute Generously!

    Become a Supporter      ::     Make a Contribution     

Share This Page