CBI was today directed to conduct further probe in a 1984-anti Sikh riots case against Jagdish Tytler with a Delhi court saying that statement of arms dealer Abhishek Verma discloses an active role played by the Congress leader in extending "helping hand" to a witness against him.
The court noted that statement given by Verma to CBI in which he has claimed that Tytler had sent the son of Surinder Singh Granthi, a key witness against him, to Canada cannot be a "sheer coincidence" and the agency should probe if the facts disclosed by Verma were true.
"The statement made by witness Abhishek Verma discloses an active role played by Jagdish Tytler in sending one Narinder Singh to Canada. Narinder is none other than the son of Surinder Singh Granthi, a key witness in the present case against Jagdish Tytler.
"It cannot be a sheer coincidence that Tytler extended a helping hand to Narinder Singh in 2004-05," Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate SPS Laler said, adding that a thorough probe was required.
"If the facts disclosed by Abhishek Verma are true, then an inference may be drawn by the court against Jagdish Tytler in the present case. Thus, it becomes necessary to find out whether the facts disclosed by him are true or not," the court said in its eight-page order.
In its order, the court elaborated on 11-points, including whether Verma had obtained a contract of Rs 50 lakh in 1988 from Air India when Tytler was the Civil Aviation Minister, which were required to be further probed by CBI.
It also asked the agency to conduct a lie-detection test on Verma, if required.
However, the judge clarified that the agency is "free to investigate the matter by whatever mode and procedure suitable in the facts of the case and the aforesaid points are only indicative of the kind of probe that can be undertaken by CBI to find out the truth."
The court also said that as CBI has filed closure reports in the case several times, so it would now monitor the probe every two months so that no aspects of the matter is left uninvestigated.
It has fixed the matter for further proceedings on February 2.
The case pertains to riots at Gurudwara Pulbangash in north Delhi where three people were killed on November 1, 1984, a day after the assassination of the then Prime Minister Indira Gandhi.
The court's order came on a protest petition filed by
complainant Lakhvinder Kaur, whose husband Badal Singh was killed in the anti-Sikh riots, challenging the CBI's closure report exonerating Tytler.
The court said that CBI should also find out when and on what grounds Canadian visa was given to Narinder and if he had ever commited any visa violations in Canada.
"If yes, obtain documents in this regard from Canadian government," it said.
The court also asked the CBI to record statement of Delhi police official Krishan, who according to Verma, was present in the car when Tytler had told Verma that a deal was struck by him with Narinder's father Surinder.
Verma had alleged in his statement that Tytler had asked him to help in sending Narinder to Canada and the Congress leader had also paid a hefty amount of Rs one crore and 50,000 US Dollars to Surinder to change his statement against him.
In its order, the court said CBI should find out if Tytler and Verma had helped Narinder in obtaining a Canadian visa and record statement of Narinder, whose phone number has been filed by the complainant in court in a sealed cover.
"All these points mentioned by the court are just to enable CBI to find out the truth, i.E. Whether Verma has given a true statement or whether he has given false statement because of some ulterior motives," the court said, adding that these points "are not mentioned to direct CBI to investigate the matter in a particular manner."
The court also dealt with the contention of senior counsel H S Phoolka, who appeared for the complainant, that a separate FIR should be registered against Tytler under sections 193 (giving false/fabricated evidence) and 195A (threatening any person to give false evidence) of the IPC and under the Money Laundering Act
It refused to order lodging of separate FIR against Tytler under these sections of the IPC saying, "The offences are part of same incident and need to be investigated in same FIR."
"Thus CBI can and should investigate the allegation of inducement to witness Surinder Singh Granthi in this very case and no separate FIR is required to be registered or ordered to be registered in this regard," it said.
(Reopens LGD 27)
However, the court noted that if facts disclosed by Verma were found to be true, then offence punishable under sections 193 and 201 (destruction of evidence) of the IPC, besides criminal conspiracy, may be attracted in the case.
"As far as offence under section 195A (threatening any person to give false evidence) of IPC is concerned the same may not be attracted in the facts of the case. But if the facts disclosed by Abhishek Verma are found to be true, then offences under sections 193 and 201 of IPC or abetment thereof besides criminal conspiracy may become applicable in the facts of the case," it said.
The court said the agency should examine two witnesses, who as per the complainant were eye-witness to the incident, to ascertain the truth in the case.
"Today complainant filed the name and address of two new witnesses, who as per the complainant, witnessed the incident under investigation. In order dated April 10, 2013, sessions court had directed CBI to examine witnesses claiming/shown/ named to be the eye witnesses of the incident.
"As such the two witnesses named today fall in the first category i.E. Witnesses who claim to be the eye witness. It would be only after their examination that CBI would be able to come to a conclusion that whether they witnessed the incident or not," the court said.
It further said, "Moreover, as per the reply filed by CBI on November 16, 2015, the CBI is also willing to examine eye witnesses. Further, phone number of Narinder Singh, son of Surender Singh Granthi, is also on court record, as it was filed with protest petition and the same can be collected by CBI from the court or complainant to examine the witness."
Directing CBI to conduct further probe, the court noted, "admittedly, further investigation is required in the present case to examine more witnesses of the incident, subject to their availability and investigation is also required to find out whether the said witnesses were actually present at the time of incident."
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.
