TrendingVideosIndia
Opinions | CommentEditorialsThe MiddleLetters to the EditorReflections
Sports
State | Himachal PradeshPunjabJammu & KashmirHaryanaChhattisgarhMadhya PradeshRajasthanUttarakhandUttar Pradesh
City | ChandigarhAmritsarJalandharLudhianaDelhiPatialaBathindaShaharnama
World | United StatesPakistan
Diaspora
Features | The Tribune ScienceTime CapsuleSpectrumIn-DepthTravelFood
Business | My MoneyAutoZone
UPSC | Exam ScheduleExam Mentor
Don't Miss
Advertisement

SC relief for cop charged with dereliction of duty during anti-Sikh riots

More than 300 lawyers assembled in the Supreme Court lawn in solidarity with the families of victims of the Pahalgam terror attack.

Unlock Exclusive Insights with The Tribune Premium

Take your experience further with Premium access. Thought-provoking Opinions, Expert Analysis, In-depth Insights and other Member Only Benefits
Yearly Premium ₹999 ₹349/Year
Yearly Premium $49 $24.99/Year
Advertisement

In a reprieve to a retired Delhi Police officer charged with abdication of duty and misconduct during the 1984 anti-Sikh riots here, the Supreme Court on Wednesday granted him consequential benefits, including revision of pension.

Advertisement

Allowing the appeal of Durga Prasad, the then SHO of Kingsway Camp police station, a Bench led by Justice PS Narasimha said arrests were made and firing resorted to.

Advertisement

Around 3,000 persons, mostly Sikhs, were killed in the riots that broke out following the assassination of the then PM Indira Gandhi on October 31, 1984, by her two Sikh bodyguards.

Prasad had challenged the Delhi HC order directing a disciplinary authority to issue a fresh order of punishment against him. He was accused by his department of dereliction of duty or negligence in controlling the riots in the area under his command as the SHO.

“Considering the limited force available, focus was on saving crucial installations and potential targets. The immediate senior of the appellant, who appeared as a defence witness, stated that the appellant did a commendable job with the limited resources available with him,” the Bench noted.

Advertisement

The top court noted, importantly, the witness was also part of the team responsible for controlling the riots, but was not chargesheeted. “Therefore, the inquiry officer relied on his statement. Most importantly, there was no evidence to show that the force was sitting idle.”

The SC held, “The order of the HC to the extent it quashed the order of punishment is affirmed. The appellant shall be entitled to all consequential benefits including revision of pension.” (With PTI inputs)

Advertisement
Show comments
Advertisement