Court asks CBI on action taken on witness claim against Jagdish Tytler

A Delhi court again asked the CBI to inform it about the efforts made by the agency to ascertain claims of arms dealer Abhishek Verma that Congress leader Jagdish Tytler, who was given a clean chit in a 1984 anti-Sikh riots case, influenced a witness and made hawala transactions.

Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate SPS Laler, who had earlier asked the question to CBI prosecutor, repeated his query in today's hearing after the agency did not respond to the court's question. While the prosecutor was explaining the reasons for giving clean chit to Tytler for the third time in the case, the court twice asked CBI about efforts taken on Verma's allegations.

"You first tell me about what efforts have been made by you (CBI) to find out what witness no. 8 Abhishek Verma is saying is truth or lie," the magistrate said.

After hearing arguments for an hour, the court fixed the matter for October 30 when CBI will continue its arguments on a protest petition filed by the riot victims challenging the third closure report in the case.
CBI will also have to give answer to the court's query.

"Continue your arguments on October 30 and also inform me about the efforts made by the agency to verify Verma's claims," the magistrate said.

The court had on October 19 also asked the CBI the same question and told the agency to respond on Wednesday.

During the hearing, CBI prosecutor P K Srivastava said as per the judgements of superior courts, the court cannot direct the probe agency to investigate a matter again and again and this was the third closure report in the case and court should accept it.

"The case has been going on from past so many years. It is in the interest of justice that the closure report be accepted and litigation should come to an end," he said.

Senior advocate H S Phoolka, representing the victims, objected to the CBI's argument saying the case is yet to begin against the accused and the agency is only filing closure reports without properly investigating the matter.

Earlier, Phoolka had sought the court's direction to CBI to lodge an FIR against Tytler for offences of influencing witness and hawala transactions. The CBI had earlier submitted that it was a central agency and the court cannot direct it to lodge FIR and as per Supreme Court judgement, it can ask state police to register the case.

The riot victims have filed a protest petition against the clean chit given thrice to Tytler by CBI, claiming there was ample evidence to prosecute him and accused the agency of favouring him.

Complainant Lakhvinder Kaur, whose husband Badal Singh was killed in the riots, in her protest petition has challenged the closure report and sought the court's direction to CBI to investigate the matter further to bring on record available "incriminating evidence" against the accused.

Seeking dismissal of the protest petition of riot victims, CBI had said that during its probe, it has been established that Tytler "was not involved in the incident of attack which took place at Gurdwara Pulbungash on November 1, 1984".

The agency described Tytler as "innocent" and said it cannot "falsely implicate an innocent person" merely on the basis of charged sentiments and to satisfy the ego of some. It said no reliance can be placed on Abhishek Verma's statement recorded by CBI in which charges of influencing witness and hawala transaction had surfaced.

The main case pertains to riots at Gurudwara Pulbangash in north Delhi where three people were killed on November 1, 1984 after the assassination of Prime Minister Indira Gandhi.

The CBI had re-investigated the case of killing of Badal Singh, Thakur Singh and Gurcharan Singh near the gurudwara after a court had in December 2007 refused to accept the closure report. Tytler has denied any role in the riots.