An edited version of the story appeared in the Indian Express on April 27, 2010.
Chinki Sinha
New Delhi, April 27, 2010
Outside the Karkardooma Court Complex, a group of Sikh men and women burnt the effigies of the two Congress leaders, one of who was let off by the court on Tuesday after it accepted Central Bureau of Investigations’ closure report in a case related to Jagdish Tytler’s alleged role in the 1984 anti-Sikh riots. On each hearing, the group has collected outside the court complex, anticipating a verdict that would avenge their loss, and their frsutration. On Monday, after Tytler's clean chit was upheld, they said they had no hope in the courts and on Friday, they would march to the Supreme Court in their final bid to get justice.
An elderly Sikh man beat his chest, and pointed to the black charred mess on the street saying this is how the Sikhs were set on fire 26 years ago in a carnage that killed more than 3,000 members of the community. The outrage was expected. The court had just let off Jagdish Tytler saying there was not sufficient material to send the Congress leader to trial.
On one side, Lakhwinder Kaur, who had opposed the investigating agency’s closure report giving clean chit to Tytler in April last year, was trying to muster more strength to go on. Slain Badal Singh’s wife’s counsel Rebecca John said this was not a final order and they would either challenge it in the High Court or the sessions court.
She said the CBI had ignored Surinder Singh’s statement where he had named at least three more witnesses who were present at Gurudwara Pulbangash in north Delhi on the day of the murder of Badal Singh. One of them, Alam Singh, works at a gurudwara in California, she said.
“CBI almost became a cross-examiner. They picked on the two witnesses,” John said.
Vrinda Grover, a Delhi-based Human Rights lawyer, said this was not an honorable discharge of the case.
“In many situations, the agency is capable of manipulating investigation. CBI investigation in this case is extremely suspect. They have pitted witnesses against witnesses. They were acting as a defense counsel in this case,” she said. “They have protected them for 25 years. Surinder Singh was alive for 25 years but Tytler managed to drag the case.”
Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Rakesh Pandit said the statement of Jasbir Singh, who is in California, had no relevance to the case of killing of Badal Singh and those of witness Surinder Singh were “self-contradictory”. Last year, the CBI filed an affidavit signed by Surinder Singh two days before his death in the court that said Tytler is innocent and was not part of the mob that attacked the gurudwara where Badal Singh was killed. But Grover said the case was never heard in the court.
“That affidavit we can’t prove whether it is right or wrong. It provided no twist in the case. It was not examined by the court. It is not on record,” she said.
John had asked the court to order further investigations in the case related to 66-year-old Tytler’s involvement in the 1984 riots.
In its closure report, CBI had said the two witnesses’ statements were “false and concocted.”
Tytler's role in the case relating to the killing of three persons, including Badal Singh near Gurudwara Pulbangash in north Delhi was re-investigated by the CBI after a court had in December 2007 refused to accept a closure report filed by the agency.
“The CBI has examined two other persons who said these three people were not there and the agency accepted that statement. We wanted further evidence. There are other witnesses,” Grover said. “Nobody wants to pursue the leads. It shows they want to protect him. We know one of the three granthis that Surinder Singh named in his statement is alive and is in California. It is the job of the agency to trace the other two. They haven’t done it.”
The counsel also said the CBI didn’t examine Satto Singh, father of Jasbir Singh.
In an affidavit filed before the Nanavati Commission, Jasbir Singh had deposed that Tylter of November 3, 1984, had instigated the mobs to carry out the riots, while Surinder Singh had said that Tytler was responsible for inciting the riots where three people, including Badal Singh was killed.
For Lakhwinder Kaur, it is yet another disappointment on the way to justice.
“Twenty five years is not a short time. I was so angry. Today, I feel like I am losing strength. Thoda hausla tootne laga hai,” she said. “But I will not give up.”
Kaur had been married two years when her husband was killed at the gurudwara by the mob. She was pregnant with a girl child and had a five-months-old daughter. She moved to Tilak Vihar where many Sikh families were resettled in the aftermath of the riots and now works as a peon in the education sector.
While Tytler was yet again given a clean chit, another Congress leader Sajjan Kumar’s trial continued in the same court complex on Tuesday with the CBI arguing that the two cases in which Sajjan Kumar is an accused – the Delhi Cantonment case in which five people were killed and Sultanpuri case where at least seven people were murdered in the riots of 1984 – must be taken up separately by the court. Counsel for the Central Bureau of Investigation, R.S. Cheema also said they would press for sedition charges against the Congress leader and base it on the testimony of Nilpreet Kaur, a riot victim, who later joined the Khalistan movement after she lost her father in the carnage.
Sajjan Kumar, Khushal Singh, Girdhari Lal, Balwan Khokhar, Mahender Yadav, Maha Singh, Capt Bhagmal, Santosh Rani and Krishna Khokhar were named as accused in Delhi Cantonment case.
The CBI field the chargesheets against Sajjan Kumar in January in two cases for allegedly making provocative speeches that instigated the mobs and led to killings of Sikhs.
The five named in the chargesheet in the case relating to killings of seven people at Sultanpuri in north Delhi are Congress leader Kumar, Ved Prakash Pial, Peru, Khushal Singh and Brahma Nand Gupta.
The case that was transferred to Additional Sessions Judge Sunita Gupta’s court this month. The accused side will begin its arguments on Wednesday.
However, in both cases involving two Congress leaders, it is interesting to note CBI’s role and method. In Tytler’s case, as alleged, it didn’t examine witnesses and ignored many crucial leads. However, in Sajjan Kumar’s case, the agency has dug out FIRs filed 25 years ago and has traced four crucial witnesses so they could depose before the court, including Nilpreet Kaur.
