File fresh status report on 1984 riots probe, SC directs Centre

The Supreme Court on Friday asked the Centre to file a fresh status report within two weeks on the implementation of the report of a special investigation team (SIT) headed by Justice SN Dhingra (retd) on the investigation into the 1984 anti-Sikh riots cases.

A Bench of Justice AS Oka and Justice Augustine George Masih asked Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati to file an affidavit and permitted the petitioners in the case to file their detailed objections before posting the matter for further hearing on January 27 next year.

On behalf of the victims, senior counsel HS Phoolka and advocate Amarjit Bedi pointed out that there were some glaring instances in the SIT report and said 500 cases were clubbed in one FIR and the investigating officer could not probe them.

“There were many instances where 498 cases were clubbed in one FIR and the IO (investigation officer) had to investigate all of them. Initially, when the hearing began, the court felt that it should be confined to Delhi only. But we have done nothing about other states. We have given examples of Kanpur, Bokaro, etc. nothing has happened,” Bedi submitted.

Almost 3,000 people were killed, most of them in Delhi, in the anti-Sikh riots that broke out following the assassination of then Prime Minister Indira Gandhi on October 31, 1984.

Acting on a petition filed by Gurlad Singh Kahlon — a former member of the Delhi Sikh Gurdwara Prabandhak Committee — the top court had in January 2018 appointed an SIT headed by Justice SN Dhingra (retd) to re-investigate 186 cases of the 1984 anti-Sikh riots that were reopened.

The Ministry of Home Affairs had on January 15, 2020, informed the Supreme Court that it had accepted the report of the SIT which implicated several Delhi police personnel and said it would take action accordingly.

Dowry laws being ‘used as weapon’: SC

Highlighting the misuse of anti-dowry laws to harass the in-laws of a woman, the SC on Friday quashed criminal proceedings against them.

The court said such laws were being used as a “weapon” in a personal discord between the estranged couple.

A Bench of Justice BR Gavai and Justice KV Viswanathan said, “In the present case also, facts, when taken at face value, do not reveal any specific instance of cruelty committed by the appellants.”

“Only stating that cruelty has been committed by appellants won’t amount to the offence under Section 498-A of IPC (cruelty for dowry) being attracted,” the Bench noted.