Anti-Sikh Riots Case

The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) has filed its final report on investigation into a 1984 anti-Sikh riots case, allegedly involving senior Congress leader Jagdish Tytler, to a court here as members of the community demanded extreme punishment for him. “Hang the culprits” rent the air outside the court complex when the CBI filed its report into the investigation in a sealed cover before Metropolitan Magistrate.

All three leaders are Congress nominees for different Lok Sabha seats in coming elections. While Tytler’s case is still pending, Kumar’s acquittal in one case has been appealed against in the Delhi High Court. No case was, however, registered against Kamal Nath.

The victims demanded “capital punishment” for the culprits. The members of the All-India Riots Victims Action Committee and other associations demonstrated with placards and banners carrying pictures of the Congress leaders.

It has already been 20 years since the incident. Even now the CBI wants to delay it.” The CBI had also recorded the statement of California-based Jasbir Singh who was earlier declared by it as “untraceable”. Besides Jasbir, it had also recorded statements of nine others.

The probe agency had on September 29, 2007, sought to close the case against Tytler. But the Court had on December 19, 2007, asked it to file the investigation report after Jasbir, the witness, surfaced and expressed his willingness to depose against the Congress leader. The case against Tytler relates to an incident on November1, 1984, when a mob had set afire Gurudwara Pulbangash, killing three persons in the riots that had broken out after the assassination of the then Prime Minister Indira Gandhi.

The Court had thrown out CBI’s first closure report to Tytler in November 2007 as it refused to agree with the agency’s line of investigation. The refusal had come after a news channel tracked down Jasbir Singh, touted as a prime witness by the Delhi Sikh Gurdwara Management Committee (DSGMC), while CBI had claimed Singh was “untraceable”.

Power Under CrPC
The Court exercised its power under the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) to dismiss the closure report. It also directed CBI to re-investigate the alleged role of Tytler, particularly in the light of Singh’s affidavit before the Nanavati Commission and his purported approval on TV to testify in the case.

The CBI has since filed five periodic investigation reports, intimating the court about progress in the probe and its efforts to record Singh’s statement. The agency had told the court on the last date of hearing that it had examined 11 witnesses in all, including Jasbir. Some CDs and other documents were also examined, the court was told. But, the CBI submitted its final report under CrPC Section 173 in a sealed cover.

Unrestricted Authorities
Relevant provisions of CrPC entrusts unrestricted authorities with a magistrate in such cases: the court can dismiss the second final report as well, because a judge is not bound by conclusions drawn by the police.

If the Court rejects the report, it can order a direct investigation into a particular aspect, or can hold an inquiry separately. According to several Supreme Court rulings, a magistrate has powers to pass such directions after receiving a report and the discretion is to be exercised “judicially” — that remains the only check.