PUNE: India; In a dramatic turn to the Gen Vaidya assassinate in case, the main accused Sukhdev Singh alias Sukha, confessed that “I fired four times at Gen Vaidya.”
Appearing totally calm and composed before the designated court of Mr, V.L. Ruikar here on Monday morning, Sukha submitted his eight page written statement in Hindi with several Punjabi words in which he confessed to the killing of Gen Vaidya on August 19, 1986.
He further said that he along with Harwinder Singh alisa Mathura Singh (killed in an encounter last year in Punjab), has arrived in the city with the aim of killing Lt General Ranjit Singh Dyal, the then General Officer Commanding In Chief, Southern Command. They came to the city on August 8, 1986 and stayed at a Gurdwara. The next day they lifted a black Indo Suzuki motorcycle from the bazaar and went to the residence of Gen Dyal while circling his house they happened to pass Gen. Vaidya’s house in the Koregaon Park area.
They saw Gen Vaidya driving his car out of the bungalow and then decided to follow it. Sukha said that Mathura Singh was riding the bike and he was sitting on the pillion.
They zeroed in on the car in its return journey and Sukha pumped four bullets into Gen Vaidya. He said that they had no intention of hurting Mrs. Vaidya (who was also hit by a bullet) said she had no hand in the action of the 1984 “Operation Bluestar.”
Giving elaborate details for the reason behind the his action Sukha stated that Gen Vaidya was the chief of army staff and Lt. General Dyal the architect of the invasion of the Golden Temple. They had attacked the temple and killed several innocent Sikhs including women and children at the behest of the Government. The latter had taken refuge under the statement that they were out to nab Sant Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale but had actually attacked the entire Sikh clan and community. This is why he and Mathura had decided to kill the two.
According to Sukha, he had pleaded not guilty to the charges framed against him on September 2 this year because most of the charges were false. Since the court did not question him in detail he had not stated the details then.
According to his statement, the CBI had falsely implicated several innocent persons on the advice of the Government, in the present case. He further said that he was not aware of or acquainted with Harjinder Singh alias Jinda. Balyinder Singh alias Binda, Nirmal Singh alias Nima, Avtar Singh Randhawa, Yadvinder Singh Peerzada and several others who have been named coaccused in this case. He was not related at anyone. of them nor did he associate at any time with those accused or had ever seen them before except Nirmal Singh who he had only met at the Pimpri police station after his arrest on September 7, 1986. The others he had met at the Yerwada
Central Prison, he said. Sukha also alleged to this statement that he was sentenced to rigorous imprisonment in the Pimpri case earlier merely on false charges.
He added that the Pimpri police along with other senior police officials had only tried to show off bravery by nabbing him and if he had really been armed as stated then he would not have failed to fire at the police officers and even killed them on the snot. Referring to the confession statement purportedly made by him and proved false by his counsel in the Pimpri case, Sukha said he had never made that statement and that he had provided this indication to the court well in time. Tracing the entire history of the Sikhs since 1733, Sukha emphasized in his statement that the Sikhs were always ready to lay down their lives for the nation and had throughout history protected the country from outside forces.
Arguing on this basis, he said their fight was not against any religion or community despite which the Government was branding them “terrorist” and eliminating: their clan. But the same government refused to take note of the attack on the Sikhs and their businesses, Furthermore, the same Congress government had fought against the British Rowlatt Act, but did not fail to introduce the Terrorists and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, he has stated.
He also made references to the Evidence Act which disqualifies police officers from deposing before the court against the accused. He said the Government had done away with this provision due to which “they can falsely implicate innocent people.”
Winding up his statement with a “Khalistan zindabad” slogan, Sukha said the Sikhs cannot live in this country since innocent Sikhs were being falsely implicated and jailed or killed in planned encounters. So, he would fight for Khalistan and Sikh “Kaum” to his very end.
The court read out the entire statement of Sukha and ‘questioned him, whether it was true, signed by him and voluntarily. He replied in the affirmative to all these questions.
Article extracted from this publication >> October 14, 1988