August 3, 2017 | By Sikh Siyasat Bureau
NewDelhi: As per the media reports the relative attempt of reopening of 1984 Sikh Genocide case by the Delhi high court here on Wednesday hasn’t gone down well with the Supreme Court of India (SCI) as it was quick to question the decision of the Delhi HC pertaining to the Sikh Massacre which involves former MLA Mahender Yadav, acquitted by a city court 31 years ago.
“Under what procedure it has been done? On what basis this order has been passed? Rightly or wrongly this man was acquitted in 1986 and no one challenged the judgment for more than 30 years. All of a sudden in some other matter this order is passed. Under what process of law the high court can unsettle it?” reads the quote from the statement given by Justice Deepak Mishra who is heading three judge bench published in An English tabloid.
The genocide survivors represented by former leader of opposition in Punjab state assembly Advocate H S Phoolka reportedly told the bench that eyewitnesses were not summoned; the trial was closed in three months and the high court had cited Zahira Sheikh’s case of the 2002 Gujarat riots case as a precedent.
Reply the case he cited for retrial Justice Deepak Mishra stated “In that case (Zahira Sheikh’s case) someone had challenged the order. Here no one challenged it… Judges should not involve themselves in such cases.”
Accused former MLA Mahender Yadav’s counsel Sultan Singh requested the Bench to stay the high court’s order to ensure that no coercive action was taken against his client. “It’s a case of Section 302 (murder),” he reportedly submitted to the court.
Furthermore, while assuaging the accused the bench stated that “Nothing will happen. It’s only a show cause notice.”
The Delhi High Court had in March 2017 sought to create a fuss by reopening the trial in five 1984 Sikh genocide cases in which all accused were acquitted in 1986.
An HC Bench of Justice Gita Mittal and Justice Anu Malhotra had issued show-cause notices to the accused, including Yadav, former councillor Balwan Khokkar and Ved Prakash, questioning why the case against them not be reopened. Perhaps the matter was decided in a hurry, the HC, which had suo motu taken up these cases during hearing of another matter, had commented, media reports said.
Senior counsel Arvind Datar, who represented petitioner Gurnad Singh, told the Bench that only nine cases were going on. He demanded that the trial in these cases should be conducted on a day-to-ay basis, reports The Tribune (TT).