The prosecution in the 1984 anti-sikh riots case sought the death penalty for former Congress MP Sajjan Kumar on Tuesday, who is convicted murdering a father-son duo in Delhi’s Saraswati Vihar area.
Kumar was convicted in a case of killing of father son duo, Jaswant Singh and Tarundeep Singh on 1 November 1984 in Saraswati Vihar area.
Additional Public prosecutor (APP) Manish Rawat filed written submissions and pressed for death penalty in view of the guidelines in Nirbhaya and other cases.
Special judge Kaveri Baweja has listed the matter for hearing arguments on sentence on February 21. The court asked the counsel for victims and accused to file their written submissions before next date.
Senior counsel H S Phoolka is also going to file his written submissions on behalf of riots victims. Meanwhile, the defence counsel could not appear due to lawyers strike and sought time to make his submissions.
APP Manish Rawat submitted that this case was a rarest of rare cases. In this case people from a community were targeted without any provocation.
It was also submitted the the incident broke the ‘entire fibre of trust and harmony among the communities,’ thereby severely effecting the knitting and assimilation of different religious and social groups.
The Rouse Avenue court on February 12, Convicted former Congress MP Sajjan Kumar in a 1984 Anti Sikh riots case. Kumar is serving a life sentence in another anti Sikh riots case of Delhi Cantt.
On January 31, the court had reserved the order after hearing additional submissions by the Public Prosecutor Manish Rawat.
Advocate Anil Sharma had submitted that Sajjan Kumar’s name was not there from very beginning, law of foreign land is not applicable in this case and there was a delay of 16 years in naming Kumar by the witness.
It was also submitted that a case in which Sajjan Kumar was convicted by the Delhi High Court is pending appeal before the Supreme court.
Advocate Anil Sharma had also referred to the case cited by the senior advocate H S Phoolka, submitting that the law of the land will prevail even in the extraordinary situation and not the international law.
Additional Public Prosecutor Manish Rawat in rebuttal had submitted that the accused was not known to the victim. When she became aware that who is Sajjan Kumar she named him in her statement.
Earlier, Senior advocate H S Phoolka had appeared for riots victims had argued that the police investigations were manipulated in the Sikh riots cases. “Police investigation was tardy and to save the accused,” read the submission.
It was argued that during riots situation was extraordinary. Therefore, these cases have to be dealt with in this context. During the arguments senior advocate H S Phoolka had referred to judgement of Delhi High Court and submitted that It is not an isolated case, it was a part of bigger massacre, it is a part of genocide.
It was further argued that as per official figures 2700 Sikhs were killed in Delhi in 1984. It was not an ordinary situation.
Senior Advocate Phoolka had referred to the Delhi High Court judgement in 1984 Delhi cantt case wherein the court called the riots a ‘crime against humanity’. It was also said that objective of genocide is always targeting of minorities.
“There is a delay. Supreme court took it seriously that there is delay and a SIT was constituted,” senior advocate Phoolka argued.
He had also referred to the judgement delivered by foreign courts in the cases of genocide and crime against humanity and the Geneva Convention.
It was also submitted that a charge sheet was prepared against Sajjan Kumar in 1992 but was not filed in the court alleging that this shows that the police was trying to save the former Congress MP.
On November 1, 2023, the court had recorded the statement of Sajjan Kumar, in which he denied all the charges levelled against him.
Initially an FIR was registered in Punjabi Bagh police station. Later on, this case was investigated by the Special Investigation Team constituted on the recommendation of justice G P Mathur committee and filed a charge sheet.
The committee had recommended the reopening of 114 cases. This case was one of them. On December 16, 2021, the court had framed charges against the accused Sajjan Kumar for commission of the offences punishable Under Section 147/148/149 IPC as well as the offences punishable Under section 302/308/323/395/397/427/436/440 read with Section 149 IPC.
It has been alleged by the SIT that the accused was leading the said mob and upon his instigation and abetment, the mob had burnt alive the above two persons and had also damaged, destroyed and looted their household articles and other property, burnt their house and also inflicted severe injuries on the person of their family members and relatives residing in their house.
It is claimed that during the course of investigation, material witnesses of the case were traced out, examined and their statements were recorded under section 161 Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC).
The statements of the complainant under the above provision were recorded on November 23, 2016. During the course of this further investigation, in which the person again narrated the above incident of looting, arson and murders of her husband and son by the mob armed with deadly weapons and she is also claimed to have deposed therein about the injuries suffered by her and the other victims of the case, including her sister in law who is stated to have subsequently expired.
She had also clarified, interalia, in that statement that the photograph of accused was seen by her in a magazine after around one and half months. (ANI)
