aristotle
SPNer
The trial in the 30-year-old anti- Sikh riots case, in which Congress leader Sajjan Kumar and three others are facing prosecution, today commenced in a court here which recorded the statement of a senior official of Delhi government.
District judge J R Aryan recorded the statement of prosecution witness Vishwendra, who is now private secretary of Lieutenant Governor of Delhi and was the then deputy secretary in Home Ministry when the sanction was given to prosecute the accused in the case.
The court directed Vishwendra to bring on January 15 records to show that the case was sent to Lt Governor of Delhi seeking sanction to prosecute the accused under section 153A (causing disharmony between different communities) of the IPC and after due consideration and applying his mind, LG had opined that it was a fit case for grant of sanction.
Advocate Anil Sharma, appearing for Sajjan Kumar, during cross-examination of Vishwendra asked him to produce material evidence to show that LG had given his consent after due consideration.
During recording of his testimony which remained inconclusive, Vishwendra identified his signatures on the documents relating to sanction and said he had no personal knowledge about them.
After the witness said he was unable to tell details without looking at the records, the court directed him to bring the documents on the next date of hearing.
Sharma was cross examining the witness on the issue of validity of sanction granted to prosecute the accused. He argued that sanction was not just formal but a legal issue.
Apart from Sajjan Kumar, Brahmanand Gupta, Peru, and Ved Prakash are also facing trial for the charges of murder and rioting in connection with the case of killing of Surjit Singh in Sultanpuri here.
(Source: http://www.business-standard.com/ar...nst-sajjan-kumar-3-others-114011001191_1.html)
District judge J R Aryan recorded the statement of prosecution witness Vishwendra, who is now private secretary of Lieutenant Governor of Delhi and was the then deputy secretary in Home Ministry when the sanction was given to prosecute the accused in the case.
The court directed Vishwendra to bring on January 15 records to show that the case was sent to Lt Governor of Delhi seeking sanction to prosecute the accused under section 153A (causing disharmony between different communities) of the IPC and after due consideration and applying his mind, LG had opined that it was a fit case for grant of sanction.
Advocate Anil Sharma, appearing for Sajjan Kumar, during cross-examination of Vishwendra asked him to produce material evidence to show that LG had given his consent after due consideration.
During recording of his testimony which remained inconclusive, Vishwendra identified his signatures on the documents relating to sanction and said he had no personal knowledge about them.
After the witness said he was unable to tell details without looking at the records, the court directed him to bring the documents on the next date of hearing.
Sharma was cross examining the witness on the issue of validity of sanction granted to prosecute the accused. He argued that sanction was not just formal but a legal issue.
Apart from Sajjan Kumar, Brahmanand Gupta, Peru, and Ved Prakash are also facing trial for the charges of murder and rioting in connection with the case of killing of Surjit Singh in Sultanpuri here.
(Source: http://www.business-standard.com/ar...nst-sajjan-kumar-3-others-114011001191_1.html)