Tuesday, July 7, 2015
ABOUT US CONTACT US ADVERTISE WITH US FOLLOW US ON    
 
India
Delhi HC issues notice to CBI
ActIT Jammu, ASP.net Projects, Java, Vb.net, C# Training Jammu
NEW DELHI, July 3 (Agencies): The Delhi High Court today refused to grant stay on a lower court order directing further probe in senior Congress leader Jagdish Tytler's role in a 1984 anti-Sikh riots case.

While refusing to grant stay, Justice S P Garg issued notice to the CBI and complainant Lakhwinder Kaur seeking its reply by September 18 on Tytler's plea challenging the lower court order.

While declining Tytler's plea for stay, Justice Garg said, "Only investigation is ordered and this court will not stop the investigation."

Appearing for Tytler, senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi sought stay on the trial court order and said the trial court has no power to direct the method and mode of investigation.

He argued that his client was not heard before passing of any order by the trial court.

Tytler had on May 30 moved the high court challenging the trial court order setting aside the CBI's closure report giving him clean chit in the 29-year-old case and directing the probe agency to examine eye-witnesses and people claiming to have information about the riots.

On May 31, Justice Kailash Gambhir had recused himself from hearing the case without assigning any reasons.

Tytler in his plea has said that the trial court order is contrary to the scheme of code of CrPC. The method and mode of investigation by a probe agency is the absolute prerogative of the agency and it is not for the court to direct the agency that which witness should be examined by it.

"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 prima facie established but direction to investigate whether any person has committed an offence or not cannot be legally given," he had said in his plea.

The trial court's order of further investigation had come on a plea by the riot victims against the CBI giving a clean chit to Tytler and filing a closure report.

Senior advocate H S Phoolka, appearing for petitioner Lakhwinder Kaur, had submitted that there was material which the agency has ignored and evidence was also there before the trial court against Tytler.

The CBI, however, had sought dismissal of the plea filed by the victim before the trial court saying the probe has made it clear that Tytler was not present on November 1, 1984 at Gurudwara Pulbangash in North Delhi where three people were killed during riots in the aftermath of assassination of the then Prime Minister Indira Gandhi.

Tytler's alleged role in the case relating to killing of three persons -- Badal Singh, Thakur Singh and Gurcharan Singh -- near Gurudwara Pulbangash was re-investigated by the CBI after the magistrate court had in December 2007 refused to accept its closure report.

CBI again gave a clean chit to Tytler on April 2, 2009 claiming lack of evidence against him in the case.

On April 27, 2010, the magistrate accepted CBI's closure report in the case against Tytler, saying there was no evidence to put him on trial.

The CBI had claimed that at the time of incident, Tytler was at Teen Murti Bhawan where the body of Indira Gandhi was laid in state and that it has already re-investigated the case on the order of trial court but there was no sufficient evidence against the Congress leader.

The magistrate had allowed CBI's closure report, saying Tytler was present at Teen Murti Bhawan and was not at the spot of crime and the contentions of CBI were justified by material, including some visual tapes and versions of some independent witnesses.

One of the witnesses, Jasbir, now residing in California, in an affidavit had claimed before the Justice Nanavati Commission that he had heard Tytler on November 3, 1984, rebuking his men for the "nominal killings" carried out in the riots.

The magistrate had rejected Jasbir's version, saying he had deposed for something which took place on November 3 while the case related to an incident of November 1, 1984.

Some of the witnesses had alleged that during the riots, Tytler was instigating the mob to kill Sikhs, a charge strongly refuted by him.

The Sessions Court had set aside the CBI's closure report giving clean chit to Tytler in the case, which has now been challenged by him.


News Updated at : Wednesday, July 3, 2013
 
Comment on this Story 
 
 
Top Stories of the Day  
Manzoor, army killed Irfan: Family
SRINAGAR, July 3: The family of Irfan Ahmad, who was killed at Markundal, today blamed Manzoor Ahmad Sheikh, an alleged army informer, and an army man for opening fire on the teenaged boy and killing him. However, the higher education minister, Mohammad Akbar Lone, put the blame on Manzoor but held army equally responsible for the killing. Manzoor, a tipper driver, had claimed that he was witness to the killing by army and later he was arrested by police. However, Irfan’s family today alleg
> Defence minister assured action: Soz
> SHRC takes notice of Markundal killings
> Tufail Matoo killing case: Family counsel concludes arguments on closure, status report
> Won’t talk about AFSPA: Omar
> 11 people from PAK detained at Nepal border
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Weather Report
 
Shridev Sharma
 
Mata Vaishnodevi | Matavaishnodevi | Mata Vaishno Devi
 
Electric Blanket | Electric Bed Warmers | Electric Under Blankets | Electric Heating Blanket
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Copyright 2013 KT Group. All rights reserved. Powered by Ideogram Technology Solutions Pvt. Ltd.