A Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) court Saturday sent the plea of a co-accused of Congress leader Sajjan Kumar in the 1984 anti-Sikh riots case to the district and sessions judge to decide its jurisdiction.<\/p>\n
Challenging the jurisdiction of the Karkardooma court, Kushal Singh, through his counsel, pleaded that all the cases should be transferred to another court as the offences were alleged to have been committed at Sultanpuri and Delhi Cantonment areas.<\/p>\n
Singh’s counsel contended that the matter should be heard in Rohini or at the Tees Hazari district courts.<\/p>\n
Special CBI judge P.S. Teji said: ‘Though the court has the power to hear this case, then also I am sending it to the district and session judge to decide.’<\/p>\n
Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Lokesh Kumar March 20 sent the two 1984 anti-Sikh riots cases involving Sajjan Kumar and the nine others to a special CBI judge for hearing.<\/p>\n
Sajjan Kumar along with other co-accused were present in the court. There was tight security in the complex. Curbs were placed on protests outside the court during the hearing.<\/p>\n
On March 10, the additional chief metropolitan magistrate’s court granted bail to Sajjan Kumar and others on furnishing a surety and personal bond of Rs.50,000 each. The CBI also provided a copy of the chargesheet to all of them.<\/p>\n
Sajjan Kumar and Singh, Girdhari Lal, Balwan Khokhar, Mahender Yadav, Maha Singh, Capt Bhagmal, Santosh Rani and Krishna Khokhar were named as accused in the murder of five people in Delhi Cantonment in the 1984 riots following then prime minister Indira Gandhi’s assassination.<\/p>\n
The CBI had filed a chargesheet against Sajjan Kumar and others in two cases for allegedly instigating mobs after the assassination Oct 31, 1984. More than 3,000 Sikhs were killed across Delhi.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
A Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) court Saturday sent the plea of a co-accused of Congress leader Sajjan Kumar in the 1984 anti-Sikh riots case to the district and sessions judge to decide its jurisdiction. Challenging the jurisdiction of the Karkardooma court, Kushal Singh, through his counsel, pleaded that all the cases should be transferred […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"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":[],"class_list":["post-4788","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-top-law-news"],"yoast_head":"\n