Why former Cong MP Sajjan Kumar was convicted of murder during the 1984 anti-Sikh riots

Arguments on the quantum of sentence in the case will be heard on February 18. Here is what to know.

Reliability of the witnesses

The FIR for this case was registered in 1991 based on an affidavit dated September 9, 1985, given by the complainant – the wife and mother of the victims – before the Justice Ranganath Mishra Commission.

The commission was appointed in 1985 by then Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi “to inquire into the organised violence that took place in Delhi…and to recommend measures that may be adopted for prevention of recurrence of such incidents.”

The main question before the court concerned the reliability of the witness testimonies. The case had three main witnesses: the complainant, her daughter, aged 14 during the incident, and her niece, then aged 21.

The Special Investigation Team (SIT) probing this case, had argued that the statements of the witnesses were reliable. On the other hand, the defence lawyers had long maintained that the complainant came forward as an eye witness after a 32-year delay, making her testimony unreliable.

What the court ruled

Sajjan Kumar’s counsel argued that the complainant, being an educated teacher with a post-graduate degree, had known about the identity of the accused – then the Congress MP for Outer Delhi – and had not named him initially.

The Court, however, rejected these arguments. It ruled that the complainant had only seen the photographs of the accused in an India Today magazine a few months after the incident and hence couldn’t identify him in her statements which were taken five days after the anti-Sikh riots. It was only after seeing the photos, that the complainant was able to name the accused. Judge Kaveri Baweja ruled that the complainant had named Sajjan Kumar “at the first available opportunity” on September 9, 1985.

“Thus the arguments of the accused that she named him for the first time after 32 years of the incident or that the complainant PW-13 is not a reliable witness, cannot be accepted…,” the judge ruled.

Relying on the statements of the complainant’s daughter, Judge Baweja said, “The incident of her father and brother being burnt alive could never fade from the memory of a 14-year-old child and this court sees no reason to disbelieve her testimony.”

“The complainant who witnessed the brutal killing of her husband and son can certainly not be expected to forget the face of the person who was instigating the mob to carry out the said killings and lootings,” the judge said. She held that the depositions of all three witnesses were “consistent and unrebutted”.

“It has been established that the accused (Kumar) was instigating the mob, which was armed with deadly weapons,” the court ruled. “…(Kumar) is guilty of having committed the murder of Jaswant Singh and Tarundeep Singh, the husband and son of Complainant PW-13, during the incident of rioting which occurred on 01.11.1984,” it added.

The cases against Sajjan Kumar

Sajjan Kumar is already in Tihar Jail, serving a life sentence handed in 2018 in a case related to the killing of five persons at Raj Nagar Part I in Palam Colony on November 1-2, 1984, and the burning down of a gurdwara in Raj Nagar Part II.

In September 2023, a Delhi court acquitted Kumar in a case related to the murder of seven people from the Sikh community in Sultanpuri during the 1984 riots.

One case is pending against Kumar in Rouse Avenue court, while two appeals against his acquittals are pending in the Delhi High Court. An appeal against his conviction in one case is pending in the Supreme Court.

After Wednesday’s conviction, Kumar’s lawyers are likely to approach higher Courts to appeal against the verdict, The Indian Express has learnt.