Court puts Tytler back in the dock
- Dalit student suicide: Protests erupt in Hyd, Cong demands sacking of Dattatreya, Irani
- Behind Dalit student suicide: how his campus showed him the door
- SC restrains Centre from disinvesting further shares in Hindustan Zinc in favour of Vedanta
- Ganga projects: Uma Bharti objects but Prakash Javadekar rejects
- Grieving Mehbooba Mufti introduces brother to party, politics
Setting aside a 2010 order which had accepted a closure report in an anti-Sikh riots case with a CBI clean chit to Congress leader Jagdish Tytler, a Delhi court on Wednesday directed the agency to reopen investigation into the death of three persons and destruction at the Gurudwara Pul Bangash during the 1984 riots following the assassination of Prime Minister Indira Gandhi.
In April 2010, a trial court had accepted the closure report in which the CBI claimed it had been unable to find any evidence against Tytler. The agency had named 43 witnesses and said not one had been able to confirm Tytler's presence at the Gurudwara Pul Bangash on November 1, 1984.
But Lokender alias Lakhvinder Kaur, widow of one of the men killed in the attack on the gurudwara, filed a revision petition against the closure report, claiming that the CBI had failed to examine certain witnesses who had seen Tytler at the scene of the crime.
Additional Sessions Judge Anuradha Shukla Bhardwaj, while setting aside the 2010 order on Wednesday, reprimanded the CBI for not recording the statements of all available witnesses. "Non-examination of these persons by the CBI was improper," the court said.
"CBI is directed to conduct further investigation... and to record the statements of witnesses, who it had come to know during the investigation itself, are claiming/shown/named to be the eyewitnesses of the incident," Bhardwaj said.
She dismissed the CBI plea that the witnesses had come forward at a later stage and had not given statements to the police or commissions of inquiry. She cited a Delhi High Court observation on "the state of the country as it was then" for the reticence of the witnesses.
Senior advocate H S Phoolka, representing petitioner Lakhvinder Kaur, argued that four men — Santokh Singh, Alam Singh, Chanchal Singh and Resham Singh — claimed to have been present at the time of the attack, and had also been mentioned in the statement made by Surender Singh whose statement had been recorded by the CBI.
- Risk taking, experimentation and teamwork must also infect government machinery
- New mobile towers, better roads are making a difference in Bastar
- Raja-Mandala: Re-imagining the Middle East
- My birth is my fatal accident
- Yes, Delhi, it worked
- Reduction in interest burden could prevent more companies heading towards bankruptcy