The Delhi high court on Wednesday issued notice to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) on an appeal of\u00a0Congress leader\u00a0Jagdish Tytler\u00a0against a trial court order reopening a case against him related to the\u00a01984 anti-Sikh riots.<\/p>\n
Justice Garg also declined to stay the investigation ordered by the trial court against Tytler, saying: “Only investigation was ordered and this court will not stop the investigation.”<\/p>\n On April 10, a trial court ordered that the case be reopened against Tytler and also set aside the CBI closure report, which gave the Delhi Congress leader a clean chit on the ground that there was “no evidence” against him.<\/p>\n Tytler, his appeal, said: “The trial court order is contrary to the Criminal Procedure Code. The method and mode of investigation by a probe agency is the absolute prerogative of the agency. It is not for the court to direct the agency about which witness should be examined by it.”<\/p>\n Seeking that the trial court order be quashed in the 29-year-old case, the plea said: “The settled position of law is that a direction for investigation can be given only if an offence is prima facie found to have been committed or a person’s involvement is prime facie established. But direction to investigate whether any person has committed an offence or not cannot be legally given.”<\/p>\n The trial court’s order came on a plea filed by riot victim Lakhwinder Kaur, who sought a further probe into the killing of three people near Gurdwara Pul Bangash in old Delhi.<\/p>\n Tytler is accused of instigating a mob that led to the murder of three men who had taken shelter at the gurdwara on Nov 1, 1984.<\/p>\n The mob attack was part of violence against Sikhs after the assassination of then prime minister\u00a0Indira Gandhi\u00a0on October 31 that year.<\/p>\n The trial court had also directed the CBI to examine witnesses and people who claimed to have information about the riots.<\/p>\n The court, setting aside the magisterial court order that accepted the CBI’s closure report, had said: “The order of the trial court accepting the closure report is set aside. The CBI is directed to conduct further investigation in the light of aforesaid facts and to record the statements of witnesses, who, it had come to know during the investigation itself, are claiming\/shown\/named to be witnesses of the incident.”<\/p>\n The probe agency had sought the dismissal of the victim’s plea, saying it had established that Tytler was not present at Gurudwara Pul Bangash on November 1, 1984.<\/p>\n However, senior advocate H.S. Phoolka, appearing for Lakhwinder Kaur, had said that there was material which the CBI had ignored.<\/p>\n Three men – Badal Singh, Thakur Singh and Gurcharan Singh – were killed near Gurudwara Pul Bangash, allegedly on Tytler’s instigation.<\/p>\n Tytler’s role in the killing of three men was re-investigated by the CBI after a court in December 2007 refused to accept the closure report.<\/p>\n The CBI claimed that Tytler was at Teen Murti House, the residence India’s first prime minister,Jawaharlal Nehru, where Indira Gandhi’s body was kept, at the time of the Pul Bangash incident.<\/p>\n It added that the agency had already re-investigated the case on the order of a trial court, but there was insufficient evidence against Tytler.<\/em><\/p>\n (Source: IANS)<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" The Delhi high court on Wednesday issued notice to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) on an appeal of\u00a0Congress leader\u00a0Jagdish Tytler\u00a0against a trial court order reopening a case against him related to the\u00a01984 anti-Sikh riots. Justice SP Garg, seeking response from the agency, also issued notice to the complainant, Lakhwinder Kaur, and asked her to […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":21,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":false,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2}},"categories":[1],"tags":[7586,24972,24975,24973,6847,24974,47776,47765,47774,47775,23371],"class_list":["post-29024","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-top-law-news","tag-1984-anti-sikh-riots","tag-1984-anti-sikh-riots-notice-issued-to-cbi-on-tytlers-plea","tag-advocate-h-s-phoolka","tag-congress-leader-jagdish-tytler","tag-justice-sp-garg","tag-lakhwinder-kaur","tag-national-news","tag-news","tag-todays-news","tag-todays-top-news","tag-top-news"],"yoast_head":"\n
\nJustice SP Garg, seeking response from the agency, also issued notice to the complainant, Lakhwinder Kaur, and asked her to reply within four weeks. The matter was posted for September 18.<\/p>\n