1984 riots case: Delhi court satisfied with video recording facility
The trial against Congress leader Sajjan Kumar and two other accused in a 1984 anti-Sikh riots case will be videographed, a Delhi court said on Friday after it expressed satisfaction over arrangements being made for recording the proceedings.india Updated: Jan 30, 2016 09:47 IST
The trial against Congress leader Sajjan Kumar and two other accused in a 1984 anti-Sikh riots case will be videographed, a Delhi court said on Friday after it expressed satisfaction over arrangements being made for recording the proceedings.
District judge Amar Nath saw the arrangements during the hearing in which two videographers installed cameras inside the courtroom.
The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) prosecutor and counsel, representing the accused, also said they were satisfied with the arrangements being put in place after which the court fixed the case for April 26 for recording of the statement of prosecution witness.
“I am satisfied that now the proceedings of this case can be videographed,” the judge said and asked the CBI to call its witness for recording of statement on the next date of hearing.
The case was transferred from Karkardooma court to Patiala House court by the Delhi high court which had directed the district judge to video record the proceedings at the cost of the accused.
On the last date of hearing, Kumar and other two accused, Brahmanand Gupta and Ved Prakash, had told the court that they were ready to bear the expenses of videography of proceedings in the matter.
These three accused are facing trial on charges of murder and rioting in the case pertaining to killing of Surjit Singhin Sultanpuri here.
The proceedings in the case were, earlier stayed, after the victim and complainant Joginder Singh had approached the HC seeking transfer of the case to another court alleging that the evidence was not being properly recorded.
While transferring the case, the HC had made it clear that the transfer was ‘warranted to protect and uphold the dignity of the judicial system and to promote the faith of citizens in courts of law’.