1984 riots case: SC stays proceedings against Sajjan
The Supreme Court today stayed the trial court proceedings against Congress leader and former MP Sajjan Kumar in a 1984 anti-Sikh riots case.chandigarh Updated: Jul 12, 2012 10:16 IST
The Supreme Court on Wednesday stayed the trial court proceedings against Congress leader and former MP Sajjan Kumar in a 1984 anti-Sikh riots case.
Final arguments on the part of the accused were to commence before the trial court on Thursday.
A bench headed by justice P Sathasivam directed the trial judge not to proceed with the trial till July 27, when the Delhi high court would take up Kumar's plea to cross-examine some witnesses whose statements before Ranganath Mishra Commission and GT Nanavati Commission are being used by the CBI against him.
The apex court order came on Kumar's appeal against the Delhi HC order refusing to stay the trial against him.
On Kumar's behalf, senior counsel Uday Lalit and Vineet Malhotra said since many of the witnesses had changed their testimonies made before the commissions, he should be allowed to confront them with regard to those statements. The CBI counsel opposed Kumar's appeal, terming it "delaying tactics".
Kumar had moved the high court against the trial court order refusing to allow him to use a riot victim's statements before judicial commissions to defend himself.
The trial court had dismissed his plea, saying that witness Jagdish Kaur's statements to the commissions could not be used for any purpose, including for discrediting her testimony.
Kumar is facing trial along with Balwan Khokkar, Kishan Khokkar, Mahender Yadav, Girdhari Lal and Captain Bhagmal for his alleged role in the killing of six people in the Delhi Cantonment area during the 1984 riots which broke out after the assassination of then Prime Minister Indira Gandhi. Kumar is accused of instigating a mob to attack and kill Sikhs.
The trial court had framed charges against Kumar and five others in 2010 under sections 302 (murder), 395 (dacoity), 427 (mischief to cause damage to property), 153A (promoting enmity between different communities) and other provisions of the IPC.
The case against him was lodged on the Nanavati Commission's recommendation.