|
Even High Court judge gets angry:
Tareek par tareek
 New
Delhi: Hearing in the appeal by the CBI in the Delhi High Court
against acquittal of Congress leader Sajjan Kumar in a 1984
anti-Sikh genocide case has hardly made any headway even six years
after the agency filed it.
On
March 5, 2007,
the court had fast tracked the case on requests from the CBI and
relatives of the victims. Though the day-to-day hearing ordered by
the court never took off, most of the time the court was forced to
adjourn the matter follow ing requests from the CBI or lawyers
representing kin of victims in the 15 hearings after it.
A Bench of
Justices B.D. Ahmed and P .K. Bhasin gave a ‘final opportunity’ to
Anwar Kaur, the widow of one Navin Singh, killed in the riot, a
witness Fota Singh and Delhi Sikh Gurudwara Prabhandak Committee who
have challenged the acquittal along with the CBI, to address on the
maintainability of their petitions at a time when the CBI has
already filed an appeal. They have to begin arguments on May 21.
|
You file
petitions for early hearing and then seek adjournments after
adjournments. You should abide by commitments. — Justice B.D.
Ahmed of
Delhi
High Court |
|
“You file
petitions for early hearing and then seek adjournments after
adjournments. You should abide by commitments,” Justice Ahmed told
lawyers representing all of them when they sought a ‘short’
adjournment on the ground that a senior lawyer arguing for all the
petitioners was not available.
“The petitioners
are yet to address on maintainability of their petitions in view of
the state through the CBI having filed an appeal. Thus before
proceeding to hear the matters on merit, the petitioners in the
aforesaid revision petitions are required to address on
maintainability of their petitions,” the court said on
July 1, 2008.
The CBI’s case
was based on the statement filed by Kaur, who had told police that a
mob instigated by Sajjan Kumar had killed her husband Navin Singh,
in front of her residence at Sultanpuri. But it collapsed when she
declared in the trial court that she was not sure whether it was
Kumar who led the mob.
The CBI said the
police, who initially handled the case, failed to investigate it
properly. In its appeal it said Sajjan Kumar’s acquittal was the
result of the trial court not evaluating the statements of the
prosecution witnesses properly .
29
April 2009
|
Read Also