NEW DELHI: In a big blow to senior Congress leader Sajjan Kumar, the Delhi high court on Tuesday dismissed his plea for quashing charges of murder and rioting in the killing of six persons at Sultanpuri area during the 1984 anti-Sikh riots.
Kumar, who was acquitted in April in another 1984 riots case, had challenged the framing of charges against him in 2010 by a trial court on several grounds including that the witnesses cited by the prosecution have already appeared and deposed before the courts earlier in related cases and that they had not named him in their statements.
Justice Suresh Kait, however, affirmed the trial court's order saying charges could be framed if there is a strong suspicion leading the court to think that there is ground for presuming that the accused has committed the offence.
The HC also rejected pleas of Ved Prakash Pial and Brahmanand Gupta challenging framing of charges against them. "It is settled law that at the initial stage if there is strong suspicion which leads the court to think that there is ground for presuming that the accused has committed the offence, a charge would be framed," the bench said.
"The requirement at the stage of charge/ framing of charge is a mere presumption leading to a strong suspicion, whereas the consideration at the stage of trial is the principle of beyond reasonable doubt ... at the stage of framing of charge, a roving and fishing inquiry is impermissible," the court added.
Challenging the trial court's order of framing of charges, Kumar had said, "After a lapse of almost 24 years surfacing of these witnesses claiming to have seen the petitioner as inciting the riot during that period in clearly contradictory to their earlier statements recorded before the court of competent jurisdiction in trial conducted for the death and riot committed during the relevant period in that very area."
The case is listed for hearing in the trial court on July 30.
In its 97-page judgment, the HC said, "When a chargesheet is filed, the facts stated by the prosecution in the chargesheet on the basis of the evidence collected during investigation, would disclose the offence for which cognizance would be taken by the court. Thus, it is not the province of the court at that stage to embark upon and sift the evidence to come to conclusion, whether or not, an offence has been made out."
The court noted CBI's submission that witnesses had testified that they didn't name Sajjan Kumar in their statements before the police as they were scared and under the influence of the higher-ups.
0 comments:
Post a Comment