A Delhi court Friday ordered framing of charges for murder and other offences against Congress leader Jagdish Tytler in a case related to alleged murder of three people in north Delhi's Pul Bangash area during the 1984 anti-Sikh riots. Special CBI judge Rakesh Siyal said there was sufficient evidence against him to put him on trial.

"Sufficient ground is there to proceed against the accused person," the judge said.&nbsp;

A witness had earlier submitted in the charge sheet that Tytler came out of a white Ambassador car in front of the Gurdwara Pul Bangash on November 1, 1984, and instigated a mob by saying "Kill the Sikhs, they have killed our mother," following which three people were killed.

Also read:&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/today-i-bow-my-head-pm-modi-issues-apology-over-shivaji-statue-collapse-754604">‘Today I bow my head,’ PM Modi issues apology over Shivaji statue collapse</a>

The court ordered framing of charges for several offences, including unlawful assembly, rioting, promoting enmity between different groups, house trespass and theft. The court has listed the matter for September 13 for formally framing the charges.

Disclaimer: This story has been published from a news agency feed with minimal edits to adhere to WION's style guide. The headline may have been changed to better reflect the content of the story or to make it more suitable for WION&nbsp;audience.

A Delhi court Friday ordered framing of charges for murder and other offences against Congress leader Jagdish Tytler in a case related to alleged murder of three people in north Delhi's Pul Bangash area during the 1984 anti-Sikh riots.

A Delhi court Friday ordered framing of charges for murder and other offences against Congress leader Jagdish Tytler in a case related to alleged murder of three people in north Delhi's Pul Bangash area during the 1984 anti-Sikh riots. Special CBI judge Rakesh Siyal said there was sufficient evidence against him to put him on trial. "Sufficient ground is there to proceed against the accused person," the judge said. A witness had earlier submitted in the charge sheet that Tytler came out of a white Ambassador car in front of the Gurdwara Pul Bangash on November 1, 1984, and instigated a mob by saying "Kill the Sikhs, they have killed our mother," following which three people were killed. Also read: ‘Today I bow my head,’ PM Modi issues apology over Shivaji statue collapse The court ordered framing of charges for several offences, including unlawful assembly, rioting, promoting enmity between different groups, house trespass and theft. The court has listed the matter for September 13 for formally framing the charges. Disclaimer: This story has been published from a news agency feed with minimal edits to adhere to WION's style guide. The headline may have been changed to better reflect the content of the story or to make it more suitable for WION audience.

1984 anti-Sikh riots: Delhi court orders framing of charges against Jagdish Tytler

Congress president Rahul Gandhi asked Sam Pitroda to apologise for his "happened, so what" remarks on 1984 anti-Sikh riots.

"I think what Sam Pitroda Ji said is completely out of line and he should apologise for it. I think 1984 was a needless tragedy that caused tremendous pain," Rahul said in a Facebook post on Friday asserting that "justice has to be done" and the people responsible for 1984 tragedy have to be punished.

"The people who were responsible for the 1984 tragedy have to be punished. The Former PM, Manmohan Singh Ji has apologised. My mother, Sonia Gandhi Ji has apologised. We all have made our position very clear - that 1984 was a terrible tragedy and should never have happened," he further said.

Terming Pitroda's comments as "completely out of line", the Gandhi scion said, "What Mr Sam Pitroda has said is absolutely and completely out of line and is not appreciated. I will be communicating this to him directly. He must apologise for his comment."

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false"><iframe allow="encrypted-media" allowtransparency="true" frameborder="0" height="242" scrolling="no" src="https://www.facebook.com/plugins/post.php?href=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.facebook.com%2Frahulgandhi%2Fposts%2F704068710027520&amp;width=500" style="border:none;overflow:hidden" width="500"></iframe></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

On Thursday, BJP, citing the Nanavati Commission report, had said that "instructions to kill" came directly from then Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi's office.

In response to this, Pitroda, while rubbishing the allegations, had said, "I don't think so, this is also another lie, and what about 1984? You speak about what you have done in five years. It happened in 1984, so what? (1984 hua toh hua). What have you done? (Ab kya hai `84 ka? Aapne kya kiya 5 saal mein, uski baat kariye. `84 mein hua to hua. Aapne kya kiya?)"

Under attack over his remarks "happened, so what" on the 1984 anti-Sikh riots, Congress leader Sam Pitroda on Friday apologised for that saying they were blown out of proportion because his Hindi is not good.

"The statement I made was completely twisted, taken out of context because my Hindi is not good, what I meant was 'jo hua vo bura hua,'&nbsp;(what happened was bad), I could not translate 'bura'&nbsp;(bad) in my mind," Pitroda, a confidant of Congress President Rahul Gandhi said.&nbsp;

Congress president Rahul Gandhi asked Sam Pitroda to apologise for his "happened, so what" remarks on 1984 anti-Sikh riots. "I think what Sam Pitroda Ji said is completely out of line and he should apologise for it.

Congress president Rahul Gandhi asked Sam Pitroda to apologise for his "happened, so what" remarks on 1984 anti-Sikh riots. "I think what Sam Pitroda Ji said is completely out of line and he should apologise for it. I think 1984 was a needless tragedy that caused tremendous pain," Rahul said in a Facebook post on Friday asserting that "justice has to be done" and the people responsible for 1984 tragedy have to be punished. "The people who were responsible for the 1984 tragedy have to be punished. The Former PM, Manmohan Singh Ji has apologised. My mother, Sonia Gandhi Ji has apologised. We all have made our position very clear - that 1984 was a terrible tragedy and should never have happened," he further said. Terming Pitroda's comments as "completely out of line", the Gandhi scion said, "What Mr Sam Pitroda has said is absolutely and completely out of line and is not appreciated. I will be communicating this to him directly. He must apologise for his comment." × On Thursday, BJP, citing the Nanavati Commission report, had said that "instructions to kill" came directly from then Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi's office. In response to this, Pitroda, while rubbishing the allegations, had said, "I don't think so, this is also another lie, and what about 1984? You speak about what you have done in five years. It happened in 1984, so what? (1984 hua toh hua). What have you done? (Ab kya hai `84 ka? Aapne kya kiya 5 saal mein, uski baat kariye. `84 mein hua to hua. Aapne kya kiya?)" Under attack over his remarks "happened, so what" on the 1984 anti-Sikh riots, Congress leader Sam Pitroda on Friday apologised for that saying they were blown out of proportion because his Hindi is not good. "The statement I made was completely twisted, taken out of context because my Hindi is not good, what I meant was 'jo hua vo bura hua,' (what happened was bad), I could not translate 'bura' (bad) in my mind," Pitroda, a confidant of Congress President Rahul Gandhi said.

Sam Pitroda was out of line, he should apologise: Rahul Gandhi on remark on 1984 anti-Sikh riots

Former Congress leader Sajjan Kumar on Monday surrendered before a court here to serve the life sentence awarded to him by the Delhi High Court in connection with a 1984 anti-Sikh riots case.

He surrendered before Metropolitan Magistrate Aditi Garg who directed that Kumar is lodged in Mandoli jail in northeast Delhi.

The court rejected Kumar's petition to be lodged in the high-security Tihar jail, but allowed his plea for security and directed the police to take him to the prison in a separate vehicle.

A lawyer present in the courtroom said the court considered Kumar's plea for security since there was a threat as he was also facing prosecution in another anti-Sikh riots case.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
Lawyer of convict Sajjan Kumar after he surrendered before Delhi's Karkardooma Court in 1984 anti-Sikh riots case: Court has sent him to Mandoli Jail. Court has also ordered that a separate van would be provided for his movement due to security reasons. <a href="https://t.co/OfypwRARkJ">pic.twitter.com/OfypwRARkJ</a>
— ANI (@ANI) <a href="https://twitter.com/ANI/status/1079672278470647808?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">December 31, 2018</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

While declining his plea to be sent to Tihar jail, the court said he was being sent to Mandoli jail in accordance with the rule.

The HC had set a deadline of December 31 for Kumar to surrender and on December 21 declined his plea to extend the time by a month.

The 73-year former Congress leader has filed a petition in the Supreme Court challenging the conviction and life sentence awarded by the HC.

The high court on December 17 convicted and sentenced Kumar to life imprisonment for the "remainder of his natural life". After his conviction, Kumar resigned from the Congress party.

The case in which Kumar was convicted and sentenced relates to the killing of five Sikhs in Raj Nagar Part-I area in Palam Colony of southwest Delhi on November 1-2, 1984 and burning down of a Gurudwara in Raj Nagar Part-II.

The riots had broken out after the assassination of then prime minister Indira Gandhi on October 31, 1984, by her two Sikh bodyguards.

Earlier in the day, former MLAs Kishan Khokhar and Mahender Yadav, who was also convicted in the same case, surrendered before the court to serve their 10-year jail term.

Besides Kumar, the others convicted in the case were former Congress councillor Balwan Khokhar, retired naval officer Captain Bhagmal and Girdhari Lal.

In its judgment, the high court had noted that over 2,700 Sikhs were killed in the national capital during the 1984 riots which were indeed a "carnage of unbelievable proportions".

It also said the riots were a "crime against humanity" perpetrated by those who enjoyed "political patronage" and aided by an "indifferent" law enforcement agency.

The high court had further said there has been a familiar pattern of mass killings since Partition, like in Mumbai in 1993, Gujarat in 2002 and Muzaffarnagar, Uttar Pradesh in 2013, and the "common" feature of each was the "targeting of minorities" with the attacks being "spearheaded by the dominant political actors, facilitated by law enforcement agencies".

The high court had set aside the trial court's 2010 verdict which had acquitted Kumar in the case.

Former Congress leader Sajjan Kumar on Monday surrendered before a court here to serve the life sentence awarded to him by the Delhi High Court in connection with a 1984 anti-Sikh riots case.

Former Congress leader Sajjan Kumar on Monday surrendered before a court here to serve the life sentence awarded to him by the Delhi High Court in connection with a 1984 anti-Sikh riots case. He surrendered before Metropolitan Magistrate Aditi Garg who directed that Kumar is lodged in Mandoli jail in northeast Delhi. The court rejected Kumar's petition to be lodged in the high-security Tihar jail, but allowed his plea for security and directed the police to take him to the prison in a separate vehicle. A lawyer present in the courtroom said the court considered Kumar's plea for security since there was a threat as he was also facing prosecution in another anti-Sikh riots case. Lawyer of convict Sajjan Kumar after he surrendered before Delhi's Karkardooma Court in 1984 anti-Sikh riots case: Court has sent him to Mandoli Jail. Court has also ordered that a separate van would be provided for his movement due to security reasons. pic.twitter.com/OfypwRARkJ — ANI (@ANI) December 31, 2018 × While declining his plea to be sent to Tihar jail, the court said he was being sent to Mandoli jail in accordance with the rule. The HC had set a deadline of December 31 for Kumar to surrender and on December 21 declined his plea to extend the time by a month. The 73-year former Congress leader has filed a petition in the Supreme Court challenging the conviction and life sentence awarded by the HC. The high court on December 17 convicted and sentenced Kumar to life imprisonment for the "remainder of his natural life". After his conviction, Kumar resigned from the Congress party. The case in which Kumar was convicted and sentenced relates to the killing of five Sikhs in Raj Nagar Part-I area in Palam Colony of southwest Delhi on November 1-2, 1984 and burning down of a Gurudwara in Raj Nagar Part-II. The riots had broken out after the assassination of then prime minister Indira Gandhi on October 31, 1984, by her two Sikh bodyguards. Earlier in the day, former MLAs Kishan Khokhar and Mahender Yadav, who was also convicted in the same case, surrendered before the court to serve their 10-year jail term. Besides Kumar, the others convicted in the case were former Congress councillor Balwan Khokhar, retired naval officer Captain Bhagmal and Girdhari Lal. In its judgment, the high court had noted that over 2,700 Sikhs were killed in the national capital during the 1984 riots which were indeed a "carnage of unbelievable proportions". It also said the riots were a "crime against humanity" perpetrated by those who enjoyed "political patronage" and aided by an "indifferent" law enforcement agency. The high court had further said there has been a familiar pattern of mass killings since Partition, like in Mumbai in 1993, Gujarat in 2002 and Muzaffarnagar, Uttar Pradesh in 2013, and the "common" feature of each was the "targeting of minorities" with the attacks being "spearheaded by the dominant political actors, facilitated by law enforcement agencies". The high court had set aside the trial court's 2010 verdict which had acquitted Kumar in the case.

1984 anti-Sikh riots: Sajjan Kumar surrenders in Delhi court, to be lodged in Mandoli jail

A Delhi High Court on Friday dismissed <a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/1984-anti-sikh-riots-sajjan-kumar-moves-high-court-to-seek-more-time-to-surrender-185458">Sajjan Kumar's plea seeking more time to surrender</a> which he filed yesterday. He is sentenced to life imprisonment in a 1984 anti-Sikh riots case.

According to a report by PTI, the court dismissed the plea saying that it sees no ground for granting relief to Sajjan Kumar to surrender.

The <a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/sajjan-kumar-resigns-from-congress-primary-membership-writes-to-rahul-gandhi-184982">former senior leader of Congress party, Sajjan Kumar </a>approached the Delhi High Court to extend his surrender time till January 30. He sought more time saying that he has to settle family affairs relating to children and property.

In his plea, Kumar has also said that he has the statutory right to file an appeal against the high court verdict for which he needs to engage senior advocates who are presently out of India on holiday as the Supreme Court is on vacations.

On Monday, the high court directed Sajjan Kumar to surrender before authorities by December 31.

The case relates to the killing of five Sikhs in Raj Nagar part-I area in Palam Colony in South West Delhi on November 1-2, 1984, and burning down of a Gurudwara in Raj Nagar part II during that period.

Kumar was convicted and sentenced to imprisonment for "remainder of his natural life" in the case by the high court on December 17 which had said the riots were a "crime against humanity" perpetrated by those who enjoyed "political patronage" and aided by an "indifferent" law enforcement agency.

On Thursday, he also appeared before Patiala House Court amid tight security in another 1984 riots case for trial. The <a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/1984-sikh-riots-case-delhi-court-adjourns-sajjan-kumar-hearing-for-january-22-185423">court adjourned the matter for January 22</a> after his main counsel was unavailable.

The riots had broken out after the assassination of the then Prime Minister Indira Gandhi on October 31, 1984, by her two Sikh bodyguards.&nbsp; 
&nbsp;

A Delhi High Court on Friday dismissed Sajjan Kumar's plea seeking more time to surrender which he filed yesterday. He is sentenced to life imprisonment in a 1984 anti-Sikh riots case.

A Delhi High Court on Friday dismissed Sajjan Kumar's plea seeking more time to surrender which he filed yesterday. He is sentenced to life imprisonment in a 1984 anti-Sikh riots case. According to a report by PTI, the court dismissed the plea saying that it sees no ground for granting relief to Sajjan Kumar to surrender. The former senior leader of Congress party, Sajjan Kumar approached the Delhi High Court to extend his surrender time till January 30. He sought more time saying that he has to settle family affairs relating to children and property. In his plea, Kumar has also said that he has the statutory right to file an appeal against the high court verdict for which he needs to engage senior advocates who are presently out of India on holiday as the Supreme Court is on vacations. On Monday, the high court directed Sajjan Kumar to surrender before authorities by December 31. The case relates to the killing of five Sikhs in Raj Nagar part-I area in Palam Colony in South West Delhi on November 1-2, 1984, and burning down of a Gurudwara in Raj Nagar part II during that period. Kumar was convicted and sentenced to imprisonment for "remainder of his natural life" in the case by the high court on December 17 which had said the riots were a "crime against humanity" perpetrated by those who enjoyed "political patronage" and aided by an "indifferent" law enforcement agency. On Thursday, he also appeared before Patiala House Court amid tight security in another 1984 riots case for trial. The court adjourned the matter for January 22 after his main counsel was unavailable. The riots had broken out after the assassination of the then Prime Minister Indira Gandhi on October 31, 1984, by her two Sikh bodyguards.

1984 anti-Sikh riots: No ground for granting relief to Sajjan Kumar, says High Court

Delhi's Patiala house court today will hear a<a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/1984-anti-sikh-riots-case-more-than-440-cases-still-pending-after-over-three-decades-184881"> 1984 anti-Sikh riots case</a> against <a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/1984-anti-sikh-riots-congress-leader-sajjan-kumar-sentenced-to-life-imprisonment-to-surrender-by-december-31-184695">Congress leader Sajjan Kumar,</a> who is accused of instigating a mob to kill Sikhs.

District Judge Poonam A Bamba is scheduled to record the statement of a key prosecution witness in the case and Kumar is directed to appear before the court.

Three persons -- Kumar, Brahmanand Gupta and Ved Prakash -- are facing trial on charges of murder and rioting in the case pertaining to the killing of Surjit Singh in Sultanpuri.

The witness, Cham Kaur, had on November 16 identified Kumar before the court as one who had allegedly instigated the mob to kill Sikhs.

Kaur had told the court that she had seen Kumar allegedly addressing the crowd in national capital's Sultanpuri area in 1984 that Sikhs had killed "our mother" and instigated the mob to kill them.

"On October 31, 1984 we were watching TV on the demise of Indira Gandhi. On November 1, 1984, when I stepped out to look for my goat, I saw accused Sajjan Kumar addressing the crowd and was saying 'hamari ma maar di. Sardaro ko maar do' (killed our mother. Kill the Sikhs)," Kaur had told the court.

She had further said the next morning, they were attacked in which her son and her father were killed.

"My son Kapoor Singh and my father Sardarji Singh were pulled out of the hiding place on the second floor, beaten badly and were thrown down from the roof," she had said, adding that she herself received injuries in the attack.

During the proceedings, Kaur had also identified Kumar, who was present in the court.

"I could recognise the accused Sajjan Kumar, as we used to visit him for getting help in making ration card, passport. We used to visit the accused for getting the papers stamps as he was the MP/MLA," she had said.

Before Kaur, another key prosecution witness Sheela Kaur had identified Kumar as the one who had instigated the mob in Sultanpuri.

The case was transferred from the Karkardooma court to the Patiala House court here by the Delhi High Court, which had directed the district judge to video record the proceedings at the cost of the accused.

Kumar and two other accused, Brahmanand Gupta and Ved Prakash, had said that they were ready to bear the expenses of the videography of proceedings.

The proceedings in the case earlier stayed after the victim and complainant Joginder Singh approached the high court seeking transfer of the case while alleging that evidence was not being properly recorded.&nbsp;

The Delhi High Court had on December 17 convicted Kumar and sentenced to imprisonment for "remainder of his natural life" in another 1984 anti-Sikh riots case, saying the riots were a "crime against humanity" perpetrated by those who enjoyed "political patronage" and aided by an "indifferent" law enforcement agency.

Delhi's Patiala house court today will hear a 1984 anti-Sikh riots case against Congress leader Sajjan Kumar, who is accused of instigating a mob to kill Sikhs. District Judge Poonam A Bamba is scheduled to record the statement of a key prosecution witness in the case and Kumar is directed to appear before the court.

Delhi's Patiala house court today will hear a 1984 anti-Sikh riots case against Congress leader Sajjan Kumar, who is accused of instigating a mob to kill Sikhs. District Judge Poonam A Bamba is scheduled to record the statement of a key prosecution witness in the case and Kumar is directed to appear before the court. Three persons -- Kumar, Brahmanand Gupta and Ved Prakash -- are facing trial on charges of murder and rioting in the case pertaining to the killing of Surjit Singh in Sultanpuri. The witness, Cham Kaur, had on November 16 identified Kumar before the court as one who had allegedly instigated the mob to kill Sikhs. Kaur had told the court that she had seen Kumar allegedly addressing the crowd in national capital's Sultanpuri area in 1984 that Sikhs had killed "our mother" and instigated the mob to kill them. "On October 31, 1984 we were watching TV on the demise of Indira Gandhi. On November 1, 1984, when I stepped out to look for my goat, I saw accused Sajjan Kumar addressing the crowd and was saying 'hamari ma maar di. Sardaro ko maar do' (killed our mother. Kill the Sikhs)," Kaur had told the court. She had further said the next morning, they were attacked in which her son and her father were killed. "My son Kapoor Singh and my father Sardarji Singh were pulled out of the hiding place on the second floor, beaten badly and were thrown down from the roof," she had said, adding that she herself received injuries in the attack. During the proceedings, Kaur had also identified Kumar, who was present in the court. "I could recognise the accused Sajjan Kumar, as we used to visit him for getting help in making ration card, passport. We used to visit the accused for getting the papers stamps as he was the MP/MLA," she had said. Before Kaur, another key prosecution witness Sheela Kaur had identified Kumar as the one who had instigated the mob in Sultanpuri. The case was transferred from the Karkardooma court to the Patiala House court here by the Delhi High Court, which had directed the district judge to video record the proceedings at the cost of the accused. Kumar and two other accused, Brahmanand Gupta and Ved Prakash, had said that they were ready to bear the expenses of the videography of proceedings. The proceedings in the case earlier stayed after the victim and complainant Joginder Singh approached the high court seeking transfer of the case while alleging that evidence was not being properly recorded. The Delhi High Court had on December 17 convicted Kumar and sentenced to imprisonment for "remainder of his natural life" in another 1984 anti-Sikh riots case, saying the riots were a "crime against humanity" perpetrated by those who enjoyed "political patronage" and aided by an "indifferent" law enforcement agency.

1984 anti-Sikh riots: Delhi court to hear second case against Sajjan Kumar today

If those responsible for the 1984 anti-Sikh riots had been punished back then, India would have been different now, the Delhi High Court today said, while asking the police to take action against those involved in the recent attacks on properties of lawyers.

A bench of Acting Chief Justice Gita Mittal and Justice C Hari Shankar observed that the lack of punishment in such cases signifies the &quot;beginning of the rot&quot; in the system.

&quot;If those responsible for 1984 riots had been punished, India would have been different,&quot; the bench said and expressed concern over the safety of the common man on the street if senior lawyers were being attacked.

When the bench was informed that the police was in the process of lodging FIRs in connection with the incidents, that occurred on January 4, 8 and 22, the bench questioned the response time and asked it to expedite the forensic analysis of the evidence gathered from the site of the attacks. The lawyers who have been at the receiving end of the arson attacks are those who have represented a woman lawyer who was allegedly assaulted by police officers and dragged out of the house she was residing in after a stalking case was lodged against her by a woman purportedly over a property dispute. When the bench was informed that the entire issue emanated from a property dispute as a land mafia was allegedly involved in it, the court remarked, &quot;It cannot be that the land mafia has grown to become a hydra.&quot;&nbsp;

On January 9 and 22, arson attacks were made on the properties and cars of senior advocates Vikas Pahwa and Kirti Uppal, who is also the president of the Delhi High Court Bar Association (DHCBA), by using inflammable substances. Uppal&#39;s Hyundai Tucson car that was parked outside his house in south Delhi&#39;s Nizamuddin West was set on fire by unidentified miscreants.&nbsp;

On January 4, two cars &mdash; a Maruti Swift and a Honda Amaze &mdash; parked in the east Delhi house of advocate Ravi Sharma were allegedly torched by unidentified persons.

The bench headed by the Acting Chief Justice issued a notice to the police in the plea moved before it for a court-monitored SIT probe into the incidents and listed it for hearing tomorrow when the agency is expected to come with an order appointing a special investigator to probe the case.

Earlier in the day, the bench had on its own taken up the issue of the attacks on lawyers as a PIL and sought an action taken report from the police. The plea for court-monitored SIT probe was moved before it later. The &quot;inevitability of punishment&quot; acting as a deterrent and concern for the safety of citizens of the city was also expressed by another bench of Justices Siddharth Mridul and Deepa Sharma which was hearing the woman advocate&#39;s matter in relation to her assault on December 18 last year allegedly by some police officers.

The proceedings before this bench in the first half of the day, witnessed high drama as some of the lawyers beat up an unknown individual inside the courtroom suspecting him to be the person who had torched the vehicles of the senior advocates. Frowning upon the incident inside the courtroom, the bench headed by Justice Mridul said, &quot;We cannot allow the court to turn into an &#39;akhada&#39; (wrestling ground). We are not going to permit this.&quot;

It also rapped the Delhi Police for the lack of any progress in the probe into the arson attacks, saying &quot;if you are unable to handle law and order in the city, let us know&quot;. &quot;We are concerned that you have an arsonist on the loose in the capital who is throwing firebombs and setting cars ablaze. What are you waiting for? A fatality? Is anybody safe? Are we safe in the courtroom? Right to be safe in our homes is inviable. We are not going to permit this,&quot; the bench said. It further said that only deterrent against such incidents was the &quot;inevitability of punishment&quot;. The bench also comprising Justice Sharma said, &quot;It was alarming that it was so easy to do something like this in the city of Delhi.&quot; The police, represented by standing counsel Rahul Mehra and advocate Tushar Sannu, assured both the benches that necessary steps and action would be taken immediately and protection would also be provided to all those persons, connected with the case, who face any threat to their safety.

A bench observed that the lack of punishment in such cases signifies the "beginning of the rot" in the system

If those responsible for the 1984 anti-Sikh riots had been punished back then, India would have been different now, the Delhi High Court today said, while asking the police to take action against those involved in the recent attacks on properties of lawyers. A bench of Acting Chief Justice Gita Mittal and Justice C Hari Shankar observed that the lack of punishment in such cases signifies the "beginning of the rot" in the system. "If those responsible for 1984 riots had been punished, India would have been different," the bench said and expressed concern over the safety of the common man on the street if senior lawyers were being attacked. When the bench was informed that the police was in the process of lodging FIRs in connection with the incidents, that occurred on January 4, 8 and 22, the bench questioned the response time and asked it to expedite the forensic analysis of the evidence gathered from the site of the attacks. The lawyers who have been at the receiving end of the arson attacks are those who have represented a woman lawyer who was allegedly assaulted by police officers and dragged out of the house she was residing in after a stalking case was lodged against her by a woman purportedly over a property dispute. When the bench was informed that the entire issue emanated from a property dispute as a land mafia was allegedly involved in it, the court remarked, "It cannot be that the land mafia has grown to become a hydra." On January 9 and 22, arson attacks were made on the properties and cars of senior advocates Vikas Pahwa and Kirti Uppal, who is also the president of the Delhi High Court Bar Association (DHCBA), by using inflammable substances. Uppal's Hyundai Tucson car that was parked outside his house in south Delhi's Nizamuddin West was set on fire by unidentified miscreants. On January 4, two cars — a Maruti Swift and a Honda Amaze — parked in the east Delhi house of advocate Ravi Sharma were allegedly torched by unidentified persons. The bench headed by the Acting Chief Justice issued a notice to the police in the plea moved before it for a court-monitored SIT probe into the incidents and listed it for hearing tomorrow when the agency is expected to come with an order appointing a special investigator to probe the case. Earlier in the day, the bench had on its own taken up the issue of the attacks on lawyers as a PIL and sought an action taken report from the police. The plea for court-monitored SIT probe was moved before it later. The "inevitability of punishment" acting as a deterrent and concern for the safety of citizens of the city was also expressed by another bench of Justices Siddharth Mridul and Deepa Sharma which was hearing the woman advocate's matter in relation to her assault on December 18 last year allegedly by some police officers. The proceedings before this bench in the first half of the day, witnessed high drama as some of the lawyers beat up an unknown individual inside the courtroom suspecting him to be the person who had torched the vehicles of the senior advocates. Frowning upon the incident inside the courtroom, the bench headed by Justice Mridul said, "We cannot allow the court to turn into an 'akhada' (wrestling ground). We are not going to permit this." It also rapped the Delhi Police for the lack of any progress in the probe into the arson attacks, saying "if you are unable to handle law and order in the city, let us know". "We are concerned that you have an arsonist on the loose in the capital who is throwing firebombs and setting cars ablaze. What are you waiting for? A fatality? Is anybody safe? Are we safe in the courtroom? Right to be safe in our homes is inviable. We are not going to permit this," the bench said. It further said that only deterrent against such incidents was the "inevitability of punishment". The bench also comprising Justice Sharma said, "It was alarming that it was so easy to do something like this in the city of Delhi." The police, represented by standing counsel Rahul Mehra and advocate Tushar Sannu, assured both the benches that necessary steps and action would be taken immediately and protection would also be provided to all those persons, connected with the case, who face any threat to their safety.

Punishments in 1984 anti-Sikh riots cases would have led to a different India: Delhi High Court