By Niticentral Staff
|
Delhi has erupted in protests once again
seeking justice for those who perished in the anti-Sikh pogrom of 1984.
The acquittal of Congress leader Sajjan Kumar sparked protests. Sikhs
stormed Metro stations in various parts of the Capital. Three decades
have passed since 3000 Sikhs were slaughtered in an organised,
Government-sponsored massacre. Victims and survivors have been running
from pillar to post in their search of justice. Denied what is due to
them, their condition today has come to be defined by anger and
anguish.
The last few days have been more of the
same for the Sikhs. After the acquittal of Jagdish Tytler and Sajjan
Kumar in cases relating tothe 1984 massacres, justice seems nowhere in
sight for the community. Below is a summary of events and facts on the
matter so that we may not forget what
Who said what ?
Punjab Chief Minister Parkash Singh Badal : “The acquittal of Sajjan Kumar is sad and very unfortunate. We will challenge it in a highercourt.”
Sushma Swaraj, Leader of the Opposition in Lok Sabha : “Supreme Court-monitored Special Investigation Team should be appointed to probe the anti-Sikh pogrom.”
Sukhbir Singh Badal, Punjab Deputy Chief Minister : “Congress would not be allowed to put a lid on 1984 anti-Sikh pogrom.”
Naresh Gujral, SAD MP :
“Gandhi family is the main perpetrators of 1984 anti-Sikh pogrom. Sikhs
cannot expect any justice from the Congress Government for the 1984
anti-Sikh pogrom.”
Manjit Singh GK, President of Delhi Sikh Gurdwara Management Committee :
“Until Congress Government is in power, judiciary will be giving this
kind of verdicts. I think the victims of 1984 must be in tears today…
you can kill as many people in the country and walk free.”
Sheila Dikshit, Chief Minister of Delhi :
“It has been politicised. The court has taken a decision and if someone
doesn’t feel it is right or injustice has been done, they can appeal in
higher court. But there is no need to politicise it.”
Renuka Chowdhary, Congress spokesperson :
“The court has taken a decision and acquitted Sajjan Kumar and we don’t
want to comment on that. We respect the court and whatever they have
said.”
Timeline of events
First day (October 31)
9:20 am : Indira Gandhi is shot by two
of her Sikh security guards at her residence, No. 1 Safdarjung Road, and
rushed to All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS).
10:50 am : Indira Gandhi dies.
11:00 am : All India Radio listeners learn that the two security guards who shot Indira Gandhi were Sikhs.
4:00 pm : Rajiv Gandhi returns from West Bengal and reaches AIIMS. Stray incidents of attacks in and around that area.
5:30 pm : The motorcade of President Zail Singh, who is returning from a foreign visit, is stoned as it approaches AIIMS.
Evening and night
Organised and well-equipped gangs of hooligans set out in different directions from AIIMS.
The violence, including violence towards Sikhs and destruction of Sikh properties, spreads.
Meanwhile, Rajiv Gandhi is sworn-in as the Prime Minister.
Senior advocate and BJP leader Ram
Jethmalani, meets Home Minister PV Narasimha Rao and urges him to take
immediate steps to protect Sikhs from further attacks.
Delhi’s Lt. Governor, PG Gavai and Police Commissioner, S.C. Tandon, visits some of the affected areas.
Second day (November 1)
The first killing of a Sikh occurs in east Delhi.
9:00 am : Armed mobs take over the streets of Delhi and launch a massacre.
Among the first targets are Gurdwaras, the holy temples of Sikhs
The worst affected areas are low income
colonies like Trilokpuri, Shahdara, Geeta Colony, Mongolpuri, Sultanpuri
and Palam Colony. The few areas where the local Police Stations take
prompt measures against mobs see hardly any killings or major violence.
Farsh Bazar and Karol Bagh are two such examples.
Third day (November 2)
Curfew is announced throughout Delhi,
but is not enforced. The Army deployed throughout Delhi too but
ineffective because the police did not co-operate with soldiers (who are
not allowed to open fire without the consent of senior police officers
and executive magistrates).
Mobs continue to rampage.
Fourth day (November 3)
Violence continued. By late evening, the
national Army and local police units work together to subdue the
violence. After law enforcement intervention, violence is comparatively
mild and sporadic. In Delhi, the dead bodies of the victims of riots
were taken to All India Institute of Medical Sciences New Delhi and
Civil Hospital Mortuary Tis hazari, Delhi.
The aftermath
The Delhi High Court, while pronouncing its verdict on a riots-related case in 2009, stated:
“ Though we boast of being the world’s
largest democracy and the Delhi being its national capital, the sheer
mention of the incidents of 1984 anti-Sikh riots in general and the role
played by Delhi Police and state machinery in particular makes our
heads hang in shame in the eyes of the world polity.”
There are allegations that the
government destroyed evidence and shielded the guilty. Asian Age, ran a
front-page story calling the government actions “the mother of all
cover-ups.”
From 31 October 1984 to 10 November
1984, human rights groups People’s Union for Democratic Rights and
People’s Union for Civil Liberties conducted an inquiry into the riots
by interviewing victims, police officers, neighbours of the victims,
army personnel and political leaders. In their joint report, entitled
Who Are The Guilty? they concluded:
The attacks on members of the Sikh
Community in Delhi and its suburbs during the period, far from being a
spontaneous expression of madness and of popular grief and anger at
Indira Gandhi’s assassination as made out to be by the authorities, were
the outcome of a well organised plan marked by acts of both deliberate
commissions and omissions by important politicians of the Congress (I)
at the top and by authorities in the administration.
Eyewitness accounts obtained by Time
magazine states the Delhi Police looked on as “rioters murdered and
raped, having gotten access to voter records that allowed them to mark
Sikh homes with large Xs, and large mobs being bused in to large Sikh
settlements”. Time reported the riots only led to minor arrests and that
no major politician or police officer had been convicted and quotes
Ensaaf, a human rights organisation, as saying the Government worked to
destroy evidence of involvement by refusing to record First Information
Reports (FIRs).
A Human Rights Watch report published in
1991 on violence between Sikh separatists and the Government of India
traces part of the problem back to the government response to the
violence:
Despite numerous credible eye-witness
accounts that identified many of those involved in the violence,
including police and politicians, in the months following the killings,
the government sought no prosecutions or indictments of any persons,
including officials, accused in any case of murder, rape or arson.
There are allegations that the violence
was led and often perpetrated by Indian National Congress activists and
sympathisers during the riot. The government, then led by the Congress,
was widely criticised for doing very little at the time, possibly acting
as a conspirator. Voting lists were used to identify Sikh families.
A few days prior to the massacre, many
surviving Sikh youth in Delhi had retaliated in either joining or
creating Sikh militant groups.This lead to series of more violence in
the Punjab, where several assassinations of senior Congress party
members took place. The Khalistan Commando Force and Khalistan
Liberation Force took responsibility of the targeted hits in
retaliation. An underground network had also been established between
the victims of the genocide and Sikh extremists.
On 31 July 1985, Harjinder Singh Jinda,
Sukhdev Singh Sukha and Ranjit Singh Gill of Khalistan Commando Force
assassinated Lalit Maken (Member – Parliament of India and a leader of
Congress (I)) to take revenge of 1984 Anti Sikh Riots. In a 31-page
booklet titled Who Are The Guilty, People’s Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL) listed 227 people who led the mobs, Lalit Maken’s name was third on the list.
Harjinder Singh Jinda and Sukhdev Singh
Sukha also assassinated Congress (I) leader Arjan Dass because of his
involvement in 1984 Anti-Sikh riots. Arjan Dass’s name appeared in
various affidavits submitted by Sikh victims to the Nanavati Commission
which was headed by Justice G.T. Nanavati, retired Judge of the Supreme
Court of India.
|
Convictions
In Delhi, 442 of the rioters were
convicted by the courts. Forty Nine of these were sentenced to the life
imprisonment, and another three to imprisonment of more than 10 years.
Six Delhi Police officers were punished for lapses during the riots.
In April 2013, the Supreme Court
dismissed the appeal of three convicts who had challenged the High
Court’s decision to award them life sentence.
Investigations
Numerous commissions have been set up to
investigate the riots. The most recent commission on the pogroms,
headed by Justice G.T. Nanavati, submitted its 185-page report to the
Home Minister, Shivraj Patil on 9 February 2005 and the report was
tabled in Parliament on 8 August 2005.
Ten commissions and committees have so
far enquired into the riots. The commissions below are listed in the
order they were formed. Many of the primary accused were acquitted or
never charge-sheeted.
Marwah Commission
This commission was appointed in
November 1984. Ved Marwah, Additional Commissioner of Police, was
assigned the job of enquiring into the role of the police during the
carnage of November 1984. Many of the accused officers of Delhi Police
went to Delhi High Court. As Ved Marwah completed his inquiry towards
the middle of 1985, he was abruptly directed by the Home Ministry not to
proceed further.[43] Complete records of the Marwah Commission were
taken over by the government and were later transferred to the Misra
Commission. However, the most important part of the record, namely the
handwritten notes of Mr Marwah, which contained important information,
were not transferred to the Misra Commission.
Misra Commission
Misra commission was appointed in May
1985. Justice Rangnath Misra, was a sitting judge of the Supreme Court
of India. Justice Misra submitted his report in August 1986 and the
report was made public six months thereafter in February 1987. In his
report, Justice Misra stated that it was not part of his terms of
reference to identify any person and recommended the formation of three
committees.
The commission and its report was
criticised by People’s Union for Civil Liberties and Human Rights Watch
as biased. A Human Rights Watch report recording the Misra Commission
noted:
It recommended no criminal prosecution
of any individual, and it cleared all high-level officials of directing
the pogroms. In its findings, the commission did acknowledge that many
of the victims testifying before it had received threats from local
police. While the commission noted that there had been “widespread
lapses” on the part of the police, it concluded that “the allegations
before the commission about the conduct of the police are more of
indifference and negligence during the riots than of any wrongful overt
act.”People’s Union for Civil Liberties criticised the Misra commission
for keeping information on the accused secret while revealing the names
and addresses of victims of violence.
Kapur Mittal Committee
Kapur Mittal Committee was appointed in
February 1987 on the recommendation of the Misra Commission to enquire
into the role of the police, which the Marwah Commission had almost
completed in 1985 itself, when the government asked that committee to
wind up and not proceed further.
After almost two years, this committee
was appointed for the same purpose. This committee consisted of Justice
Dalip Kapur and Mrs Kusum Mittal, retired Secretary of Uttar Pradesh. It
submitted its report in 1990. Seventy-two police officers were
identified for their connivance or gross negligence. The committee
recommended forthwith dismissal of 30 police officers out of 72.
However, till date, not a single police officer has been awarded any
kind of punishment.
Jain Banerjee Committee
This committee was recommended by the
Misra Commission for recommending registration of cases. It consisted of
Justice M.L. Jain, former Judge of the Delhi High Court and Mr A.K.
Banerjee, retired Inspector General of Police.
The Misra Commission held in its report
that a large number of cases had not been registered and wherever the
victims named political leaders or police officers, cases were not
registered against them. This committee recommended registration of
cases against Mr Sajjan Kumar in August 1987, but no case was
registered.
In November 1987, press reports
criticised the government for not registering cases despite the
recommendation of the committee. In December 1987, one of the co-accused
along with Sajjan Kumar, namely Mr Brahmanand Gupta filed a writ
petition in the Delhi High Court and obtained a stay against this
committee. The government did not oppose the stay. The Citizen’s Justice
Committee filed an application for vacating the stay. Ultimately, the
writ petition was decided in August 1989 and the high court quashed the
appointment of this committee. An appeal was filed by the Citizens
Justice Committee in the Supreme Court of India.
Potti Rosha Committee
Potti Rosha Committee was appointed in
March 1990, by the V.P. Singh government, as a successor to the Jain
Banerjee Committee.In August 1990, Potti-Rosha issued recommendations
for filing cases based on affidavits victims of the violence had
submitted. There was one against Sajjan Kumar. A CBI team went to
Kumar’s home to file the charges. His supporters locked them up and
threatened them harm if they persisted in their designs on their leader.
As a result of this intimidation, when Potti-Rosha’s term expired in
September 1990, Potti and Rosha decided to disband their inquiry.
Jain Aggarwal Committee
The committee was appointed in December
1990 as a successor to the Potti Rosha Committee. It consisted of
Justice J.D. Jain, retired Judge of the Delhi High Court and Mr D.K.
Aggarwal, retired DGP of Uttar Pradesh. This committee recommended
registration of cases against H.K.L. Bhagat, Sajjan Kumar, Dharamdas
Shastri and Jagdish Tytler.
The Committee also suggested setting up
of two – three Special Investigating Teams in the Delhi Police under a
Deputy Commissioner of Police and the overall supervision by the
Additional Commissioner of Police, In-charge – CID and also to review
the work-load of the three Special Courts set up to deal with October –
November 1984 riots cases exclusively so that these cases could be taken
up on day-to-day basis.
The question of appointment of Special
Prosecutors to deal with October – November 1984 riots cases exclusively
was also discussed. This committee was wound up in August 1993.
However, the cases recommended by this committee were not even
registered by the police.
Ahuja Committee
Ahuja Committee was the third committee
recommended by the Misra Commission to ascertain the total number of
killings in Delhi. This committee submitted its report in August 1987
and gave a figure of 2,733 as the number of Sikhs killed in Delhi alone.
Dhillon Committee
The Dhillon Committee, headed by Mr
Gurdial Singh Dhillon was appointed in 1985 to recommend measures for
the rehabilitation of the victims. This committee submitted its report
by the end of 1985. One of its major recommendations was that the
business establishments, which had insurance cover, but whose insurance
claims were not settled by insurance companies on the technical ground
that riot was not covered under insurance, should be paid compensation
under the directions of the government. This committee recommended that
since all insurance companies were nationalised, they be directed to pay
the claims. However, the government did not accept this recommendation
and as a result insurance claims were rejected by all insurance
companies throughout the country.
Narula Committee
Narula Committee was appointed in
December 1993 by the Madan Lal Khurana led BJP government in Delhi. One
of the recommendations of the Narula Committee was to convince the
Central Government to grant sanction in this matter.
Mr. Khurana took up the matter with the
Central Government and in the middle of 1994, the Central Government
decided that the matter did not fall within its purview and sent the
case to the Lt. Governor of Delhi. It took two years for the Narasimha
Rao Government to decide that it did not fall within Centre’s purview.
Narasimha Rao Government further delayed
the case. This committee submitted its report in January 1994 and
recommended the registration of cases against H.K.L. Bhagat and Sajjan
Kumar. Ultimately, despite the delay by the Central government, the CBI
was able to file the charge sheet in December 1994.
The Nanavati Commission
The Nanavati Commission was established
in 2000 after some dissatisfaction was expressed with previous reports.
It was appointedby a unanimous resolution passed in the Rajya Sabha.
This commission was headed by Justice G.T. Nanavati, retired Judge of
theSupreme Court of India. The commission submitted its report in
February 2004. The commission reported that recorded accounts
fromvictims and witnesses “indicate that local Congress leaders and
workers had either incited or helped the mobs in attacking the Sikhs”.
Its report also found evidence against Jagdish Tytler “to the effect
that very probably he had a hand in organising attacks on Sikhs”. It
also recommended that Sajjan Kumar’s involvement in the rioting required
a closer look. The commission’s report also cleared Rajiv Gandhi and
other high ranking Congress (I) party members of any involvement in
organising riots against Sikhs. It did find, however, that the Delhi
Police fired about 392 rounds of bullets, arrested approximately 372
persons, and “remained passive and did not provide protection to the
people” throughout the rioting.
Role of Jagdish Tytler:-
Jagdish Tytler in 2010
India’s Central Bureau of Investigation
(CBI) closed all cases against Jagdish Tytler in November 2007 for his
alleged criminal conspiracy to engineer riots against Sikhs in the
aftermath of Indira Gandhi’s assassination on 31 October 1984. CBI
submitted areport to the Delhi court which stated that no evidence or
witness was found to corroborate the allegations against Tytler of
leading murderous mobs during 1984 Re-probe Tytler’s role: Court.
It was also alleged in the court that
then member of Indian Parliament Jagdish Tytler was complaining to his
supporters about relatively “small” number of Sikhs killed in his
parliamentary constituency Delhi Sadar, which in his opinion had
undermined his position in the ruling Indian National Congress Party of
India.
However in December 2007, a certain
witness, Jasbir Singh, who is living in California, appeared on several
private television news channels in India, and stated he was never
contacted by Central Bureau of Investigation. India’s main opposition
party Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) demanded an explanation from the
minister in-charge of CBI in Indian Parliament. However, Minister of
State for Personnel Suresh Pachouri, who is in-charge of department of
CBI, and was present in the parliament session, refused to make a
statement.
On 18 December 2007, Additional Chief
Metropolitan Magistrate of Delhi Court, Sanjeev Jain, who had earlier
dismissed the case after CBI submitted a misleading report in his Court,
ordered CBI to reopen cases relating to 1984 anti-Sikh riots against
Jagdish Tytler.
In December 2008, a two-member CBI team
was sent to New York to record the statements of two eyewitnesses,
Jasbir Singh and Surinder Singh. The two witnesses have stated that they
saw Jagdish Tytler lead a mob during the riot, but did not want to come
to India as they feared for their security. They also blamed the CBI
for not conducting a fair trial and accused it of protecting Tytler.
However, in March 2009, CBI gave a clean chit to Tytler, amidst protests from Sikhs and the Opposition Parties.
On 7 April 2009, a Sikh reporter with
Dainik Jagran, Jarnail Singh hurled his shoe at home minister P
Chidambaram in protest against the clean chit given to Tytler and Sajjan
Kumar. He was however let off as the home minister did not want the
police to pursue the case, in lieu of the upcoming Lok Sabha (general)
elections.
On 9 April 2009, over 500 protesters
from various Sikh organisations from all over the country gathered
outside the court which was scheduled to hear CBI’s plea of closing the
case against Congress leader Jagdish Tytler in the 1984 anti-Sikh
riotscase. Later in the day, Tytler announced his decision to pull out
of the Lok Sabha elections, saying he does not want to cause
embarrassment to his party. This has forced the Congress party to cut
the Tytler and Sajjan Kumar Lok Sabha tickets.
On 10th April 2013, Delhi court ordered
the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to reopen the 1984 anti-Sikh
riots case against Congress leader Jagdish Tytler.Court ordered CBI to
further probe killing of 3 persons in a 1984 anti-Sikh riots case in
which Jagdish Tytler was given a clean chit.
Source : Niti Central
Comments
Post a Comment
Please leave a comment, as it helps us to improve our articles...!