What Action Taken on Witness Claim Against Jagdish Tytler: Court to CBI

New Delhi: A Delhi court today asked CBI to inform it about the efforts made by it to ascertain claims of controversial arms dealer Abhishek Verma that Congress leader Jagdish Tytler, who was given a clean chit in a 1984 anti-Sikh riots case, influenced a witness and made hawala transactions.

Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate SPS Laler asked the question to CBI prosecutor after hearing arguments of the counsel for riots victims on a protest petition challenging the third closure report in the case.

"Just clarify what efforts have been made by you (CBI) to find out what witness no. 8 Abhishek Verma is saying is truth or lie," the magistrate asked the CBI.

The prosecutor, however, sought time to reply to the query after which the court fixed the matter for October 28.

Regarding the argument of senior advocate HS Phoolka, representing the victims who have sought the court's direction to CBI to lodge an FIR against Mr Tytler for offences of influencing witness and hawala transactions, the prosecutor said CBI is a central agency and the court cannot direct it to lodge FIR.

Advertisement

The prosecutor said as per a Supreme Court judgement, the court can direct State Police to register an FIR but not CBI.

During the arguments on the protest petition, Mr Phoolka contended that keeping in view the seriousness of the offence the court should not accept the closure report.

Advertisement

He said earlier when witness Narinder Singh was giving statement in favour of Mr Tytler, CBI was able to trace him and record it and now when he was deposing against him, the agency says he was not available.

He argued that Mr Tytler had sent Narinder Singh, son of witness Surinder Singh, to Canada and through him the Congress leader was putting pressure on his father to change the statement and depose in his favour.

Advertisement

"Now CBI asks the poor complainant, a widow, to trace out the witness who gives statement against Tytler. Narinder's information is available with the embassy and they do not need the witness for that. Narinder's whereabouts were known to CBI in 2008 when he was in Canada, he is still there and we have given his phone number to the agency and it is still same," the counsel said.

He also said like earlier two closure reports, CBI was "very keen and anxious" to give a clean chit to Mr Tytler so they can file the third closure report.

Advertisement

"Victim has filed a plea in this court that charges of influencing witness and hawala transactions were clearly made out against Tytler. But, the prosecutor gave a statement in the court that nothing was done in this regard and no FIR or investigation was done by the agency," Mr Phoolka said while concluding his arguments on the protest petition.

The riot victims have filed a protest petition against the clean chit given thrice to Mr Tytler by CBI, claiming there was ample evidence to prosecute him and accused the agency of favouring him.

Advertisement

Complainant Lakhvinder Kaur, whose husband Badal Singh was killed in the riots, in her protest petition has challenged the closure report and sought the court's direction to CBI to investigate the matter further to bring on record available incriminating evidence against the accused.

Seeking to dismiss with heavy cost the protest petition filed by riot victims, CBI had said that during its probe, it has been established that Mr Tytler "was not involved in the incident of attack which took place at Gurdwara Pulbungash on November 1, 1984".

The agency described Mr Tytler as "innocent" and said it cannot "falsely implicate an innocent person" merely on the basis of charged sentiments and to satisfy the ego of some.

"During the course of investigation and further probe, it has been established that Jagdish Tytler was not involved in the incident of attack which took place on Gurdwara Pulbangash on November 1, 1984," CBI said in its reply filed in response to the protest petition.

It said no reliance can be placed on Abhishek Verma's statement recorded by CBI in which charges of influencing witness and hawala transaction had surfaced.

The main case pertains to riots at Gurudwara Pulbangash in north Delhi where three people were killed on November 1, 1984 after the assassination of Prime Minister Indira Gandhi.

The 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. Mr Tytler has denied any role in the riots.