Appeal for impartial and effective prosecution
of
Sajjan Kumar Congress (I)M.P.
In November 1984,
following the assassination of Prime Minister Indira Gandhi, almost
3,000 Sikhs were slaughtered and burnt to death in Delhi. Witnesses
and survivors of these killings categorically indicted the Delhi
Police and some leaders of the Congress (I) for permitting the mobs
to kill with impunity. 23 years later the families of the victims
are still awaiting justice.
The C.B.I. has filed
an Appeal filed before the Delhi High Court, against the acquittal
of Congress (I) M.P. Sajjan Kumar, in a case pertaining to the
murder of one Nevin Singh husband of Anwar Kaur on 1st
November, 1984 at Sultanpuri in North – West Delhi. Senior Advocate
S.S. Gandhi appeared on behalf of the CBI to argue the Appeal on 12th
March, 2007.
It is pertinent to
draw attention to the fact that the same lawyer, Shri S.S. Gandhi,
Senior Advocate, had appeared on behalf of Delhi Police, before the
Justice Nanavati Commission of Inquiry (1984 Anti – Sikh Riots). The
Ranganath Misra Commission, Kusum Mittal Committee, the Justice Jain
Aggarwal Committee, the Nanavati Commission Report and court
judgments have all pointed to the unholy nexus between the Delhi
Police and the rioting mobs of 1984, during the carnage and in the
investigation of cases. The Nanavati Report endorsed the findings of
the Misra Commission and the Kusum Mittal Committee that, either the
police “were negligent in the performance of their duties or that
they had directly or indirectly helped the mobs in their violent
attacks on the Sikhs.”(pg.183, Nanavati Report) As many as 90 Delhi
police officials were indicted for lapses by these inquiries and
summary dismissal of 6 senior Delhi Police officers was recommended.
While considering the
evidence against Sajjan Kumar, the Nanavati Report specifically
states that, “There is ample material to show that no proper
investigation was done by the police even in those cases…There is
also material to show that police did not note down the names of
some of the assailants who were influential persons. One witness has
specifically stated that he had named Shri Sajjan Kumar as one of
the assailants yet his name was not noted in his statement by the
police.”(pg. 161 Nanavati Report). The Nanavati Commission
recommended to the Government to examine those cases where the
witnesses have accused Shri Sajjan Kumar specifically and yet no
chargesheets were filed against him and these cases were terminated
as untraced…” by the Delhi Police.
Advocate Vrinda
Grover, had appeared as a witness before the Nanavati Commission and
shown through her study of court judgments that the acquittals in
the 1984 trials in Delhi, were a direct consequence of the
incompetent, casual and partisan investigation by the Delhi Police.
She stated in her affidavit that “the police had functioned not as
an agent of the rule of law but as an agent of the ruling party”.
After her deposition before the Commission she had been cross
examined by Shri S.S. Gandhi, Sr. Advocate on behalf of the Delhi
Police.
According to Section
35 of the Advocates Act, 1961, the definition of professional
misconduct includes ‘changing sides’. Having appeared for the Delhi
Police before the Justice Nanavati Commission it is against
professional etiquette and ethics for Sr. Advocate S.S.Gandhi to now
represent the case of the victims through the State, in the Delhi
High Court. Although it is Congress M.P. Sajjan Kumar who is being
prosecuted by the CBI, the negligence of the Delhi Police in
investigation and recording of witness statements would be relevant
issues during the Appeal. It is apprehended that such conflict of
interests may compromise the prosecution. The prosecution of a
sitting M.P. of the ruling Congress (I) party deserves to be
conducted in a fair and impartial manner, for justice must not only
be done but must also seem to be done.
At stake are the
secular claims of the UPA Government , the institutional autonomy of
the CBI and the faith of the people who have sought justice for 23
years, in the legal system of Indian democracy.
We the undersigned
appeal that Mr. S.S. Gandhi be discharged and the CBI appoint a
senior counsel of high professional competence and impeccable
integrity as counsel in the Appeal pending in the Delhi High Court
against Sajjan Kumar.
Signatories:
·
Pushkar
Raj for Peoples Union for Civil Liberties ( PUCL Delhi)
·
Sudha
Bhardwaj for Peoples Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL Chhattisgarh)
·
Nagraj
Adve for Peoples Union for Democratic Rights (PUDR)
·
Mukul
Sharma (Director, Amnesty International India)
·
Dr. Uma
Chakravorty (Historian)
·
Javed
Anand (Co-Editor Communalism Combat)
·
Harsh
Mander (Columnist and social activist)
·
Sadhana
Arya for Saheli, Womens’ Resource Centre
·
Farah
Naqvi (Journalist and Activist)
·
Gautam
Navlakha (Journalist and activist)
·
Dr.
Apoorvananad (Professor Department of Hindi, Delhi University)
·
Aseem
Srivastava (Columnist)
·
Amit
Sengupta (Journalist)
·
Jamal
Kidwai (Director AMAN Trust)
·
Vrinda
Grover (Advocate)
