1984 riots case: Tytler moves HC against order to frame charges

Congress leader Jagdish Tytler on Monday [CHECK] approached the Delhi high court challenging a city court order framing charges against him in a 1984 anti-Sikh riots case that resulted in the death of three people in the Capital.
On August 30, a city court had ordered his physical appearance for the framing of charges under IPC sections 143 (unlawful assembly), 147 (rioting) 153A (promoting enmity between different groups), 188 (disobedience of the order duly promulgated by a public servant), 295 (injuring or defiling a place of worship), 436 (mischief by fire or explosive substance with intent to destroy house), 451 (house trespass), 380 (theft in dwelling house), 149 (common object), 302 (murder) and 109 (abetment). The court had, however, discharged him under Penal Code (IPC)’s Section 148 (rioting armed with deadly weapons).
Tytler’s plea before the high court alleged that the city court’s order was “perverse”, “illegal” and “lacked application of mind”.
Terming the framing of charges as “erroneous”, the Congress leader asserted that the charges were framed on unfounded grounds, as there was no credible evidence to corroborate the allegations levelled against him.
“The impugned order is misconceived, has been passed mechanically and without application of mind,” the plea read.
He contended that the case against him was a “witch hunt” and harassment where he was being made to face trial for an alleged offence which was committed more than four decades ago.
The case against Tytler is related to his alleged involvement in an incident of November 1, 1984, when three people — Badal Singh, Sardar Thakur Singh and Gurbachan Singh — were burnt to death, and the Pul Bangash Gurudwara was set ablaze, a day after the then prime minister Indira Gandhi was assassinated on October 31.
Seeking to quash the order, Tytler, in his plea, said that he was never named in the FIR filed by the police in 1984, and no action was recommended against him in the chargesheet and the first two supplementary chargesheet filed by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) in 2007, 2009 and 2014.
“At present, apart from the petitioner, no other accused has been named, and the CBI after having filed the supplementary chargesheets/closure reports in favor of the petitioner is now seeking to rely on the statements of the witnesses who have earlier deposed contrary to what has been deposed in the third supplementary chargesheet wherein the petitioner has been summoned,” the plea added.
According to the CBI charge sheet, the agency established Tytler’s presence at the crime scene based on the testimonies of six witnesses, of which four saw him allegedly instigating the crowd. The charge sheet claimed that Tytler was disappointed that more Sikhs were not killed in his constituency. It further pointed out that he was also influencing the investigation and threatening witnesses.
The trial court took cognisance of the charge sheet filed on July 26 last year and issued a summons to Tytler to appear before the court. Tytler moved an anticipatory bail application. The court accepted his personal as well as surety bonds converting the anticipatory bail to regular bail.