The Supreme Court, on February 17, directed the Delhi Police to ensure that Special Leave Petitions (SLPs) challenging acquittals in six cases related to the 1984 Anti-Sikh Riots are filed within a maximum period of six weeks. The bench, comprising Justice AS Oka and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan, issued the order while hearing a petition filed by S Gurlad Singh Kahlon in 2016 under Article 32 of the Constitution.

During the proceedings, the Delhi Police informed the court that they had already filed SLPs in two of the eight cases where appeals against acquittals were dismissed due to delays. The police confirmed their intention to file petitions in the remaining six cases.

“SLP will be filed by the State of Delhi in the following six cases... considering the fact that this bench is seized of WP 9/2016, the SLP shall be placed before the Honourable Chief Justice of India, seeking administrative directions for tagging those SLPs along with the present writ petition.”

The bench further ordered:

“We direct the State of Delhi to ensure that SLP in the aforesaid cases are filed in the maximum period of six weeks from today.”

Read Also:- Allahabad High Court Directs Police to Ensure Lawyers’ Unhindered Access During Maha Kumbh, Stresses Justice Cannot Wait

The Role of Justice Dhingra Committee

In 2018, the Supreme Court constituted the Justice SN Dhingra Committee to examine the cases related to the 1984 riots. The committee submitted its report in January 2020, highlighting major lapses in the investigation process. It noted that many cases were deliberately derailed and recommended filing appeals against acquittals.

However, the Delhi High Court dismissed several such appeals due to procedural delays. The Supreme Court’s latest directive ensures that the pending petitions are filed without further delay.

Concerns Raised by the Petitioners

Senior Advocate HS Phoolka, representing the petitioners, presented crucial findings regarding the mishandling of cases. He emphasized that Justice Muralidhar’s judgment from the Delhi High Court had previously pointed out a “great cover-up” in the prosecution of the 1984 riot cases.

“These are not normal cases. With the view to shield the accused, the trials were sham, the investigations were compromised, and the prosecutors themselves weakened the cases. This is the High Court's finding.”

The petitioners pointed out that in one murder case involving 56 accused, charges were framed against only five individuals, while the remaining 51 were discharged. They argued that the State must take action to frame charges against all accused individuals.

Read Also:- Supreme Court's Interpretation of Section 156(3) CrPC and BNSS Section 175(3): Judicial Approach and Accountability

Additionally, they highlighted that in numerous cases of murder and gang rape, no trial took place due to premature closure reports filed by investigating agencies.

Further Investigation and Expansion of the Case Scope

The Supreme Court had initially issued a notice in the case to examine 186 instances of crimes committed during the riots. However, the petitioners urged the court to consider additional criminal cases beyond the scope of the Justice Dhingra Committee's report.

“Once my lords take a decision on whether we are restricting it to the 183/186 cases, then we can file the other cases.”

Regarding the delayed disposal of Suo Motu criminal revision petitions in four cases, the Supreme Court instructed the Registrar General of the Delhi High Court to submit a status report.

Additionally, the Supreme Court officially dissolved the Justice Dhingra Committee, while acknowledging and appreciating the significant efforts made by Justice SN Dhingra.

“We compliment the efforts taken by Justice Dhingra and the role played by him.”

Case Details: S Gurlad Singh Kahlon v. Union of India | WP (Crl) 9/2016