1984 Riots: Delhi HC laments doomsday of criminal justice system, upholds conviction of 89

Twenty-two years after the Trial Court’s verdict, the Delhi High Court today dismissed the appeals of eighty-nine persons convicted in a case pertaining to the 1984 Riots..“The appeals are thus dismissed. The bail bonds of the appellants are cancelled. They are directed to forthwith surrender to undergo the punishment awarded against them”, a Single Judge Bench of Justice RK Gauba decreed on the twenty three criminal appeals filed before the Court..In August, 1996, the Trial Court had convicted eighty-nine persons for offences punishable under Sections 188, 147 and 436 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 and sentenced them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years. The case pertains to the riots that took place in the Trilok Puri area against the Sikh community in the aftermath of former Prime Minister Indira Gandhi’s assassination..The 79-page verdict, however, goes beyond merely upholding the order of conviction and sentencing of the accused persons..“Thirty four long years have passed after the crimes were committed and, yet, the victims await justice and closure. Is this what we call a potent and effective criminal justice system? Is our judicial apparatus at all equipped to deal with the crimes of such magnitude? Do we have lessons to be learnt from this sordid experiment in the name of criminal law process?“, the Court questions..Terming the question of guilt as just an academic exercise, Justice Gauba further commented,. “That the criminal justice administration may falter or crumble, or lose its potency, is no longer a distant doomsday scenario. It appears to have arrived and stares at us in the face.”.The Court recorded that not only did the police fail in promptly registering the crimes or collecting the possible/requisite evidence, the prosecution agencies and the court also failed to “rise to the occasion or live up to the task”..“..the manner in which the case was handled, or lingered, at the stage of committal proceedings before the Magistrate, was designed to ensure the case would not proceed with the promptitude it deserved.”.The case at hand, Justice Gauba writes, may be treated “as a paradigm which ought not be followed in cases of such nature”..“The law and order machinery had broken down. The police forces, and the civil administration, did not take timely or effective action to prevent the riotous conditions from spiraling out of hand. The criminal law process began, but hesitatingly and belatedly. The fact that these cases have continued to linger in the courts at the stage of trial or appeals or revisions till date itself is an indicator of the reality that the response of the law has been tardy, ineffective and highly unsatisfactory.”.The Court also noted that the investigating agency and the prosecution “had no coordination between themselves”..“The fact that the initial two charge sheets presented in December, 1985 were prepared, also under the advice of the prosecution branch, shows that the quality of the legal assistance availed of by the State were questionable.”.Justice Gauba ultimately concludes,.“The general criminal law is provenly ill-equipped to deal with the challenge of such crimes (communal riots) of mammoth proportion, particularly when they invariably are perceived to be engineered by those holding control over certain power centers.”.He therefore, “hopes and trusts” that the Legislature will consider enactment of a special law to deal with such crimes effectively at an early date..Nonetheless, based on his experience in the present case, Justice Gauba makes the following suggestions to the Centre:. – Suitable amendments be brought to the Commissions of Inquiry Act, 1952 and the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993 to entrust the responsibility of taking note of the cognizable offences committed in communal riots and their investigation through SITs and Special Public Prosecutor(s)..– Such Commissions would have their own investigative machinery to probe in an effective manner. Such Commissions might avail the assistance of Legal Service Authority and the judicial magistracy to make the effort more comprehensive and effective..– This neutral agency would ensure that no charge-sheet is brought to the criminal court for taking of cognizance, or trial, unless it has been properly vetted dispassionately by those well-trained in criminal law such that it is free from any defect, inadvertent or otherwise.. – Special Courts dedicated to the subject of communal riots be established with suitable amendments to the general criminal law procedure as indeed the rules of evidence..– Press reports, supported by photographic material or video footages put in public domain, be considered as evidence in trials of criminal cases arising out of communal riots..– An exception be carved out to permit the absence of accused from the court hearings to tackle one of the major causes for delay in the judicial process. Such rule of procedure in cases of trial in communal cases involving large number of accused would have a salutary effect..Finally, Justice Gauba ends the verdict with the hope that this case is never forgotten,.“The manner of prosecution of the case at hand would undoubtedly go-down in judicial history of this country as an example of criminal law process that must never be emulated. From this perspective, and in the expectation that those at the helm draw lessons from here, one hopes that this case is never forgotten. “.Read the Judgment: