1984 Sikh riots case: On December 17, the Delhi High Court had convicted former Congress leader Sajjan Kumar, who was convicted of a Sikh riot, and sentenced to death.
Congress leader Sajjan Kumar, who was convicted of 1984 riots, surrendered in Delhi’s Karkardooma court on Monday. They are preparing to be sent to Mandoli prison. Recently, the Delhi High Court convicted Sajjan Kumar and sentenced him to life imprisonment while convicting the riots. Sajjan Kumar had appealed to give some time to the date of surrender which the court had refused.
Sajjan Kumar’s lawyer told the news agency PTI that the chances of getting relief from his client are quite low as the holidays are being ended on January 1 in the Supreme Court, which is not expected to hear his appeal. Sajjan Kumar’s lawyer said, “We will follow the High Court verdict.”
#Latestvisuals Delhi: Sajjan Kumar, who was awarded life sentence by Delhi High Court in 1984 anti-Sikh riots case, to surrender before Karkardooma Court or Tihar jail authorities today pic.twitter.com/tgnHrWD81r
— ANI (@ANI) December 31, 2018
1984 Sikh riots case
On December 17, the Delhi High Court had convicted Congress leader Sajjan Kumar for his imprisonment while convicting the Sikh riots. In its verdict, the court had said that 2700 Sikhs were killed in the national capital in 1984 riots and this incident was an incredible genocide. The court called this incident “a crime against humanity” and said that there were people behind it who had political protection and the law enforcement agencies also supported them.
In his judgment, the court mentioned that since the time of the partition of India, it has been the only way of massacre in 1993 in Gujarat and 2002 in Gujarat and in Muzaffarnagar 2013 and under the leadership of influential political people, Minorities were targeted and the law enforcement agencies helped them.
The High Court rejected the request of Sajjan Kumar on December 21, in which he requested the court to extend the surrender till January 30. Sajjan Kumar, while requesting extension of the period, said that he has to deal with some family issues related to his children and property and also need to have time to challenge this decision in the top court.
319 total views, 3 views today