scorecardresearch
Friday, Mar 29, 2024
Advertisement
Premium

Explained: 35 years after transistor blasts in Delhi, how prosecution’s case fell

On May 10, 1985, bombs fitted in transistors went off in buses and other places in Delhi and adjoining areas of UP and Haryana. On the next two days, two more live transistor bombs were found in Delhi.

Delhi 1985 blasts, Delhi 1985 bomb blasts, 198 blasts Delhi, 1985 bomb blasts Delhi, India news, Indian Express Series of transistor bombs went off in May 1985. (Express Archive)

Last week, a Delhi court acquitted 30 of the 59 individuals chargesheeted for a series of transistor bomb blasts that took place in 1985. Of the remaining 29, five are proclaimed offenders who never appeared for trial, five had been discharged in 2006, and 19 are now dead.

The blasts had killed 49 people and injured 127 in Delhi alone. On May 10, 1985, bombs fitted in transistors went off in buses and other places in Delhi and adjoining areas of UP and Haryana. On the next two days, two more live transistor bombs were found in Delhi.

The police case

FIRs were lodged under the Explosive Substances Act against unknown persons. During their investigation, police received information about transistor bombs being manufactured in a house in Delhi’s West Patel Nagar, from where they arrested three men — Kartar Singh Narang, Mohinder Singh Oberoi, and Manmohan Singh.

Advertisement

Police claimed that searches of the men and Narang’s house had unearthed a piece of paper on which the formula of gunpowder was written, and another containing names and telephone numbers of others (who were subsequently made accused); items used for making bombs, live .22 cartridges, and gunpowder; and documents showing that the blasts were carried out in protest against the killing of Sikhs following Indira Gandhi’s assassination, and against Operation Blue Star.

A Special Investigation Team under A K Kanth, then DCP (Central) of Delhi, was set up in 1985.

Festive offer 49 people were killed in Delhi. (Express Archive)

The trial

Cases registered in UP and Haryana were transferred to Delhi, to be tried together, on orders passed by the Supreme Court in 1986, 1989 and 1991.

Advertisement

On July 31, 2006, the Delhi court framed charges under various sections of the IPC including murder, attempt to murder, criminal conspiracy and waging war against the government of India, under the Explosive Substances Act and the Arms Act.

After the charges were framed, a fresh FIR was registered regarding documents having gone missing. In August 2006, a departmental inquiry was initiated against officials responsible for the disappearance of court documents. The original police chargesheet too was misplaced and police filed a reconstructed chargesheet.

The defence counsel contended that the accused had been falsely implicated.

📢 Express Explained is now on Telegram. Click here to join our channel (@ieexplained) and stay updated with the latest

The grounds for acquittal

Advertisement

On March 5, Additional Sessions Judge Sandeep Yadav ruled that the investigation “was defective, lopsided, unfair and suffered from various lacunae”.

* The court said the prosecution failed to prove which of the accused was involved in which blast, and what was the fate of five other cases registered in South Delhi. It was not even proved that these accused knew each other and thus, the court said, the very foundation of charge of conspiracy is shaken. It said it was not proved which of the accused was an expert in making transistor bombs, which were not used in any blasts earlier.

* The court noted there is hardly any evidence on record against the accused besides their own disclosure statement. It said police had picked up various persons and made them approvers after pressuring and torturing them. A number of witnesses deposed about the manner in which they were pressured by police, “so as to create a false edifice of the alleged conspiracy”.

* Documents including disclosure statements, seizure memos, statements under Section 164 CrPC, pamphlets/letters, are not on record. The court said it cannot even be said that these documents went missing; the prosecution did not establish that these documents existed.

Advertisement

* About the alleged recoveries, the judge observed that no effort was made by “investigating officers to associate public witnesses to recovery/search proceedings rendering the same doubtful”. In some cases, public witnesses were associated with the investigation but they were not examined in court. The prosecution examined 354 witnesses out of 1,399 cited in their chargesheet.

Don’t miss from Explained | Here is how scientists are finding a cure for coronavirus 

* The court referred to Tomaso Bruno and Anr vs State of UP (2012), in which the Allahabad High Court held that where a case is based on the circumstantial evidence, proof of motive will be an important corroborative piece of evidence. In the Delhi case, while the prosecution’s version was that the accused had hatched a conspiracy to create disharmony amongst various communities to take revenge for Operation Blue Star and the riots of November 1984, the prosecution “miserably failed to prove that any relatives, friends, near and dears of the accused persons died in the 1984 riots or in Blue Star Operation”, the court said.

First uploaded on: 12-03-2020 at 04:32 IST
Latest Comment
Post Comment
Read Comments
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
close