New Delhi [India], The Rouse Avenue Court on Thursday recorded the statement of the doctor who issued the medical certificate to the complainant, whose both his hands were broken during the 1984 anti-Sikh riots. He said the nature of the injuries was serious.
This case is related to two cases of riots that took place in Janak Puri and Vikas Puri areas in 1984. The court had acquitted former Congress MP Sajjan Kumar of the crime of murder.
Special judge (MP-MLA cases) Kaveri Baweja recorded the statement of Dr Rakesh Kumar Sharma, who had issued the medical certificate at Deen Dayal Upadhyay Hospital on November 15, 1984, to Harvinder Singh Kohli, who was a complainant in one of the cases.
Dr. Sharma said that on November 15, 1984, he issued a medical certificate to Harvinder Singh Kohli and mentioned in it that his right and left hands and also his right shoulder were fractured. Based on the medical certificate, he said that the nature of the injuries was serious.
The court had acquitted Sajjan Kumar on August 23.There will be prosecution for other crimes related to riots etc.
The Janakpuri case relates to the murder of two Sikhs, Sohan Singh and his son-in-law Avtar Singh, on November 1, 1984. And the second case was registered at Vikaspuri police station on November 2, 1984, related to the burning of Gurcharan Singh. ,
The court booked Sajjan Kumar under IPC sections 147 (punishment for rioting), 148 (rioting, armed with deadly weapon), 149 (offence committed by any member of an unlawful assembly in prosecution of the common object of that assembly). Charges were framed under. , 153 (promoting enmity between different groups), 295 (injuring or desecrating a place of worship with intent to insult the religion of any class), 307 (attempt to murder), 308 (attempt to commit culpable homicide) ), 323 (deals with punishment for voluntarily causing hurt), 395 (punishment for robbery) and 426 (punishment for mischief) etc.However, the court ordered him to be acquitted of the offense under sections 302 (punishment for murder) and 325 (punishment for voluntarily causing grievous hurt) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
While ordering framing of charges, the special court said, "This court is prima facie of the opinion that the oral and documentary evidence placed on record by the prosecution is sufficient to hold that an unlawful assembly or gathering involving hundreds of people and were armed with deadly weapons." On November 1, 1984, weapons like sticks, iron rods, bricks and stones etc. were gathered near the Gurudwara located in Gulab Bagh, Nawada.
The Court had said that the accused Sajjan Kumar was also a part of the said mob and the common objective of the said mob was to set fire to the said Gurudwara and to burn and loot the goods lying in it and to burn and destroy them. To damage, destroy or plunder the houses of the Sikhs situated in the said locality and to kill their goods or property and to kill the Sikhs living in that locality in order to avenge the assassination of the then Prime Minister Smt. Indira Gandhi.Therefore, a prima facie case is made out against the accused/Sajjan Kumar for committing offenses punishable under sections 147/148/149/153A/295/307/308/323/325/395/436 IPC. And accordingly, charges are directed to be framed against him for the said offences. Further, alternatively, the accused is also directed to be charged for the offense of abetment as defined by section 107 IPC and made punishable by section 109 r/w 114 IPC regarding the above offenses as the accused is the main abettor. Is. He was present at the crime scene when the crimes instigated by him were committed by other unknown criminals.
However, so far as the offenses committed during the incident of 2nd November, 1984 are concerned, relating to the murder of Sohan Singh and Avtar Singh at the hands of the mob or members of the mob who had gathered near or outside the Congress on that date .Party Office at Uttam Nagar, and the injuries sustained by the complainant Harvinder Singh in the said incident are also concerned, the accused be acquitted for the reasons already discussed for the offenses under sections 302 and 325 of the IPC respectively committed in the said incident. Used to be. This order, the court said.
Advocates Anil Sharma, SA Hashmi and Anuj Sharma appeared on behalf of Sajjan Kumar in the case.
This case is related to two cases of riots that took place in Janak Puri and Vikas Puri areas in 1984. The court had acquitted former Congress MP Sajjan Kumar of the crime of murder.
Special judge (MP-MLA cases) Kaveri Baweja recorded the statement of Dr Rakesh Kumar Sharma, who had issued the medical certificate at Deen Dayal Upadhyay Hospital on November 15, 1984, to Harvinder Singh Kohli, who was a complainant in one of the cases.
Dr. Sharma said that on November 15, 1984, he issued a medical certificate to Harvinder Singh Kohli and mentioned in it that his right and left hands and also his right shoulder were fractured. Based on the medical certificate, he said that the nature of the injuries was serious.
The court had acquitted Sajjan Kumar on August 23.There will be prosecution for other crimes related to riots etc.
The Janakpuri case relates to the murder of two Sikhs, Sohan Singh and his son-in-law Avtar Singh, on November 1, 1984. And the second case was registered at Vikaspuri police station on November 2, 1984, related to the burning of Gurcharan Singh. ,
The court booked Sajjan Kumar under IPC sections 147 (punishment for rioting), 148 (rioting, armed with deadly weapon), 149 (offence committed by any member of an unlawful assembly in prosecution of the common object of that assembly). Charges were framed under. , 153 (promoting enmity between different groups), 295 (injuring or desecrating a place of worship with intent to insult the religion of any class), 307 (attempt to murder), 308 (attempt to commit culpable homicide) ), 323 (deals with punishment for voluntarily causing hurt), 395 (punishment for robbery) and 426 (punishment for mischief) etc.However, the court ordered him to be acquitted of the offense under sections 302 (punishment for murder) and 325 (punishment for voluntarily causing grievous hurt) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
While ordering framing of charges, the special court said, "This court is prima facie of the opinion that the oral and documentary evidence placed on record by the prosecution is sufficient to hold that an unlawful assembly or gathering involving hundreds of people and were armed with deadly weapons." On November 1, 1984, weapons like sticks, iron rods, bricks and stones etc. were gathered near the Gurudwara located in Gulab Bagh, Nawada.
The Court had said that the accused Sajjan Kumar was also a part of the said mob and the common objective of the said mob was to set fire to the said Gurudwara and to burn and loot the goods lying in it and to burn and destroy them. To damage, destroy or plunder the houses of the Sikhs situated in the said locality and to kill their goods or property and to kill the Sikhs living in that locality in order to avenge the assassination of the then Prime Minister Smt. Indira Gandhi.Therefore, a prima facie case is made out against the accused/Sajjan Kumar for committing offenses punishable under sections 147/148/149/153A/295/307/308/323/325/395/436 IPC. And accordingly, charges are directed to be framed against him for the said offences. Further, alternatively, the accused is also directed to be charged for the offense of abetment as defined by section 107 IPC and made punishable by section 109 r/w 114 IPC regarding the above offenses as the accused is the main abettor. Is. He was present at the crime scene when the crimes instigated by him were committed by other unknown criminals.
However, so far as the offenses committed during the incident of 2nd November, 1984 are concerned, relating to the murder of Sohan Singh and Avtar Singh at the hands of the mob or members of the mob who had gathered near or outside the Congress on that date .Party Office at Uttam Nagar, and the injuries sustained by the complainant Harvinder Singh in the said incident are also concerned, the accused be acquitted for the reasons already discussed for the offenses under sections 302 and 325 of the IPC respectively committed in the said incident. Used to be. This order, the court said.
Advocates Anil Sharma, SA Hashmi and Anuj Sharma appeared on behalf of Sajjan Kumar in the case.
