NEW DELHI: For the first time since the November 1984 massacre of Sikhs in Delhi the high court has refused to order stay on contemplated government action against the policemen accused of negligence or worse.
And for the first time the court has also noted the lack of action on accountability in this regard. “From 1984 to today no action has been taken” said Mr BLN. Kirpal one of the two judges hearing the plea for a stay yesterday. “Nothing has been done till now.”
Mr LR Gupta counsel for the accused policemen withdrew the entire stay plea on behalf of 19 such official’s on the judge’s advice else indicated Kirpal and the other judge Santosh Duggal they would dismiss it. “We don’t know what action is contemplated (against the policemen) if at all” they told Gupta. “You can come here again if such an order (or action) has been passed (by the government).”
The formal court order notes Gupias withdrawing the petition while keeping the option to petition a fresh if such government action is taken. At Guptas urging the words “or if reasonable apprehension exists (that such action is coming)” were added to the formal order.
Rebuffed by Kirpal and Duggal were eight policemen who had filed such petitions last week and further 11 who have since added their pleas. The first eight were with the police stations they had headed in 1984): Suryavir Singh (Kalyanpuri) Hari Ram Bhati (Sultanpuri) Rajendra Siagh Dahiya (Mangolpuri) Rohtas Singh Dethi Cant) Rampal Singh (Nangloi) Om Prakash Yadav (Sriniwaspuri) Ramesh Pal Singh (Yamunapuri) and Ram Chander Singh (Punjabi Bagh) Of these eight Dahiya and Yadav have since been promoted other rank of assistant commissioner. The other are headed by an additional Dupty commissioner Mahavir Sigh the then assistant commissioner (Ashok Vina) five men who have since been promoted to assistant commissioner rank – urga Prasad Roop Chand Jaipal Singh Sheodeen Singh and three inspectors Yeshvir Singh Ramchandra pakur and Sat Pal Kaushik and a sub inspector Jai Chand in 170% they headed the police stations of Kingsway Camp Adarsh Nagar Seemapuri Mehrauli Sarai Rohilla and Moti Nagar among others.
One more assistant commissioner (the then head of Krishna Nagar police station) S.M Bhaskar has filed the same plea through a different counsel. His case will be heard since his counsel said he had already been exonerated in a departmental probe and he would like to argue on additional legal points.
As reported the government is preparing to charge sheet at least 40 city police officials for their role in November 1984 based on the report of Mital and a retired head of the Delhi high court Dalip Kapur were asked in early 1987 to probe the conduct of city police officials during the massacre nearly 3000 Sikhs had been killed in three days.
They asked for the power to summon these men and cross-examine them; the government sat on the request. Kapur then decided that the inquiry could not do its job Mital disagreed. After all she reasoned the polices own internal records station diaries and so forth were available And their jobs she decided was to see if there was a basis for action by the government. So in early 1990 each gave a separate report. Kapoor saying the job was impossible and unfair to the police men if they could not be first heard Mital recommending action against 70 six to be dismissed without any departmental probe 34 more to get a major penalty after such a probe and the role of 30 more to be investigated further. The government accepted her report.
How demanded L.R.Gupta of the two judges could Mitals report be the basis for action? When her own probe-team member Kapur said it was unjust? He also cited other cases to support his plea.
The judges could not be moved though the arguments waxed for the better part of 90minutes. “Wait for action to be taken; then you can come and ask for a stay with these arguments” they said. “How do you presume action is going to be taken at all let alone on the basis of Mital report specifically?”
Gupta noted a number of press reports on what the government intended plus a statement of the government six months ago to the Rajya Sabhas assurances committee specifically saying the Mital report would be the basis for action. “It’s dangerous to take action other basis of preseasons” said an unmoved Kirpal. “We don’t know what action is contemplated (by the government) if at all”
The real tussle between the bench and counsel was on Guptas insisting that the Mital report was invalid because none indicted in it was invited to give his defence first “You can initiate the process (of departmental action even on the basis of allegations” replied Kirpal for the two “You (Gupta) are saying even departmental action cannot be initiated by the government. There has to be some basis for such action Mitals was merely a fact-finding commission for this. You’re asking us to lay down the law on service matters. It could be any delinquent officer if courts interfere before any action is taken it will be disastrous. Suppose both the committee members had recommended no actions and the government rejected it and went ahead it can it can accept or reject any recommendation for executive action.”
In his anxiety to convince the judges Mr Gupta tripped on facts At one point he said the Kapur Mital report had been “printed verbatim” in the press. At another he said it had been tabled fully before the Rajya Sabha committee referred to. Both untrue. And he amused his clients too in telling the judges that their service records till 1984 had been “outstanding”. A number of them grinned at each other behind his back. It was the one moment of the relaxation for them otherwise they watched their case being lost with mounting anxiety and irritation.
The case was actually listed before a two-judge bench of Mr Y.K Sabharwal and Mrs Sunanda Bhandare. It was passed onto the Kirpal Daggal bench after Mr Sabharwal said he could not deal with the issue: he had been counsel for the government in 1985 whether same Mr L.R. Gupta had got a slay from the Delhi high courts against the first official probe into the 1984 slaughter by the city police additional commissioner Mr Ved Marwah.
Also transferred to the Kirpal Duggal bench was an almost idenfical plea for a stay on the Mital report filed in 1988 by the head of the east district police in 1984 Mr Seva Dass. The new bench will now hear the case on March 13.
Article extracted from this publication >> February 21, 1992
