NEW DELHI: The judicial System in India has become a hand-maiden of a communal and fanatic political state. Here is a Case study of Indian Supreme Court’s highhandedness against certain youths belonging to the minority Sikh community. The Case pertains to the arrest of seven youths Amarinder Singh, Kanwaljit Singh, Avtar Singh, Tejinder Singh, Devinder Singh, Mann Singh and Surinder Singh on charges of hijacking a plane in 1984, The youths have been lodged at Ajmer in Rajasthan to stand trial under the Terrorist Affected Areas (Special Courts) Act No 51 of 1984.
This Act’s validity was challenged in the Supreme Court of India through a writ petition (No 15432 of 1984) which is still pending for a hearing and in which a rule nisi had been issued on October 30, 1984 by the Constitution Bench consisting of chief justice and four other judges Tulzapurkar, R.S. Pathak, D.P. Madaan, and M.P. Takhar. Inspite of the above mentioned rule nisi, hearing under the draconian law went on at Ajmer. Prosecution continued with the proceedings until 7/21/87, statements of the accused were recorded and prosecution arguments were concluded.
Criminal appeals No 157/85, 52/ 85, 212/85, 158/85 and 29/85 were filed by the accused concerned in the cases challenging the validity of the Special Courts law. The Supreme Court bench ordered on 19.7.85 to the following effect: “In view of the order of the chief justice that the terrorist matters under the Special Courts Act should be heard only after the constitutional validity of the Act which has been challenged in this court is decided by the Constitution Bench. Hence the cases are adjourned till after the decision of the Constitution Bench.”
Inspite of the above mentioned order; the special court at Ajmer went on with the trial of the seven Sikh youths but finally had to stop the proceedings on 11/23/89, for more than 52 months after the Supreme Court’s order.
Amarinder Singh’s (not the accused) filed a writ petition No.S80 of 1989 requesting the Supreme Court to vacate the stay order, because he argued that the Constitution Bench would decide the validity of the Special Court law after the stay was vacated. The Supreme Court Bench consisting of chief justice and justice J.S.Verma, 5S.C.Aggarwal, Yogeslmar Dayal and As Anand vacates the stay order on 7/30/92 but remarked that “the prosecution in the case was closed on July 21,1987; statement of the accused recorded 4/5 313 cryptic, and defence arguments were in progress, when the stay came into effect. If an order is planed (by the Special Court) against which the accused have any grievance, it will always often approach this court by way of appeal to challenge the decision of the Special Court and if so advised, they may raise/ revive the challenge to the vires of the said Act at that stage, the question can be considered as to whether that appeal should be either taken up along with W.P. 1534/84 of heard thereafter.”
Amarinder Singh and others saw through the game and filed a Review Petition on 8/24/92 in Writ Petition No.580 of 1989, seeking review of the order Dalit 7/30/92 on the grounds (a) that the other accused has filed the Writ Petition, challenging the constitutionality of the Terrorist Affects Areas (Special Courts) Act no 61/1984 which is under challenge in Writ Petition no. 15432/1984 pending from hearing before the Constitutional Bench of the Supreme Court and was impugned on similar grounds in Writ Petition no. 580/1989 which was dismissed on the basis of application for vacating the stay without giving to the petitioner an opportunity of being heard and also contrary of the Order dated 11/23/89 that it was to be taken up only after hearing of the Writ Petition no. 15432/84 which is still pending.
(b) There are ample precedents wherein the Supreme Court has held that to decide a matter without giving hearing to the parties, is denial of justice.
(c) That the Act impugned in the petition by the orders of 7/30/92 is violative of the Fundamental Rights under Articles 14, 19, 21, 22 and the basic structure of the constitution of India to vacate the stay order by order dated 7/30/92 amounts to denying the petitioner, his fundamental rights.
(d) A large number of matters are pending for disposal, only after the Constitutional validity of the impugned Act is decided by the Constitutional Bench as evident from the Order date 7/19/85.
(e) To allow the trial to proceed to its conclusion, there is not a ghost of achance that justice will prevail as the scales of justice are heavily (already) weighed against the petitioner and others, it is almost certain that the accused would be convicted and we would be compelled to seek justice from Court, not as accused but as convicts.
(f) The trial in case no. ASC/ Ajmer/1/85 he stayed till the Constitutional validity of the impugned Act is decided.
This Review Petition is pending in the Supreme Court.
Amarinder Singh etc., Sikh youths are incarcerated in the far flung Ajner Central jail for more than eight years and they, still do not see the end of the tunnel, The Supreme Court of India’s Constitutional Bench has not yet decided about the validity of the Special Courts Act even after filing of the Writ Petition no. 15432 of 1984. The Supreme Court had on 7/19/85 stayed all proceedings in such cases, till the validity of the Act is decided but inspite of the above, the special court carried on the trial. It is obvious from the case that a fair trial for religious minorities particularly Sikhs in India is a thing of the pre-Independence era. They have been left with no legal remedy in India.
Article extracted from this publication >> October 16, 1992
