Tag: Beant Singh

  • The 1984 Anti-Sikh Pogrom and the Delayed Justice: The Case of Sajjan Kumar

    By Prof. Indrajit S Saluja
    By Prof. Indrajit S Saluja

    The 1984 anti-Sikh riots remain one of the darkest stains on India’s history. The fact that it took 34 years to convict a single leader and that many others died without facing trial is a testament to the failures of the justice system. While the sentencing of Sajjan Kumar provided a small measure of justice, it came far too late for many victims.

    The assassination of Prime Minister Indira Gandhi on October 31, 1984, by her Sikh bodyguards, Beant Singh and Satwant Singh, set off a horrific chain of events that led to one of the darkest chapters in India’s post-independence history. In the days following her killing, a pogrom was unleashed against the Sikh community in Delhi and other parts of India. Mobs, reportedly orchestrated and incited by political leaders, targeted Sikh homes, businesses, and gurudwaras. More than 3,000 Sikhs were brutally murdered, and thousands more were displaced. The violence, marked by extreme brutality, was widely seen as a state-sponsored massacre.

    Despite the scale and nature of the violence, justice remained elusive for the victims and their families for decades. Successive governments failed to take decisive action, and many of those accused, including prominent political leaders, continued to hold positions of power. One such figure was Sajjan Kumar, a senior leader of the Congress Party, who was finally sentenced to life imprisonment in 2018—34 years after the pogrom, and he remained behind bars as the legal system slowly caught up with those responsible. His sentencing was a momentous but long-overdue step, illustrating the maxim that “justice delayed is justice denied.”

    The anti-Sikh riots that erupted in Delhi and other parts of India from November 1-4, 1984, were not spontaneous acts of mob violence. They were widely believed to be organized, with Congress Party leaders allegedly directing the rioters and police standing by as Sikhs were killed. Eyewitnesses testified that the mobs were armed with voter lists to identify Sikh households. The rioters used petrol, kerosene, and tires to burn Sikh men alive, while women were assaulted and children killed mercilessly.

    The violence was most pronounced in Delhi, where over 2,700 Sikhs were killed. Other affected areas included Kanpur, Bokaro, and other parts of Uttar Pradesh, Haryana, Madhya Pradesh, and Bihar. The police were accused of being complicit, either refusing to register complaints or actively supporting the rioters. The central government, led by Rajiv Gandhi, failed to intervene effectively, with the infamous justification that “when a big tree falls, the earth shakes.”

    Over the years, multiple commissions and committees were formed to investigate the 1984 anti-Sikh pogrom. However, justice remained elusive due to deliberate delays, political interference, and lack of willpower to hold the powerful accountable. Some of the most prominent inquiries included:

    Marwah Commission (1984): The first inquiry, led by Ved Marwah, was abruptly stopped by the government before it could complete its report.

    Misra Commission (1985): This commission, led by Justice Ranganath Misra, was widely criticized for its bias in favor of the Congress Party. It absolved many top leaders of wrongdoing, further eroding Sikh trust in the system.

    Jain-Banerjee Committee (1987): This committee recommended the prosecution of several Congress leaders, including Sajjan Kumar, but its findings were ignored.

    Poti-Rosha Committee (1990) and Jain-Aggarwal Committee (1991): These commissions recommended further investigation but faced obstruction from political forces.

    Nanavati Commission (2000-2005): After nearly two decades, this commission confirmed that Congress leaders such as Sajjan Kumar and Jagdish Tytler were involved. However, the government took little action.

    Special Investigation Team (SIT) (2015): In 2015, the Narendra Modi government appointed an SIT to reopen cases, leading to the conviction of several perpetrators, including Sajjan Kumar.

    Sajjan Kumar, a former Congress MP, was accused of inciting mobs to kill Sikhs in multiple locations in Delhi, including Sultanpuri, Mongolpuri, and other Sikh-dominated areas. Survivors and witnesses testified that he was seen directing the mobs and instructing them to attack Sikh homes and businesses.

    Despite overwhelming evidence, he evaded justice for decades due to political patronage and a lack of prosecutorial effort. It was only in December 2018, after sustained pressure from Sikh advocacy groups and the reopening of cases by the SIT, that the Delhi High Court found him guilty of murder, rioting, and conspiracy. He was sentenced to life imprisonment, a landmark ruling that finally held a senior politician accountable. The judgment noted that the killings were “crimes against humanity” and emphasized the failure of law enforcement agencies in protecting Sikhs.

    The 41-year delay in convicting Sajjan Kumar reflects the broader failure of India’s legal and political system in delivering justice for the 1984 victims. Many perpetrators, including prominent Congress leaders, never faced trial and died without punishment. Jagdish Tytler, another accused leader, continued to serve in various political capacities despite being named in multiple reports. Similarly, Kamal Nath, who was alleged to have played a role in the violence, went on to become a cabinet minister and Chief Minister of Madhya Pradesh.

    For the Sikh community, the 1984 massacre remains an open wound. The lack of timely justice has deepened their sense of alienation and betrayal. Sikhs across the world, particularly in Canada, the UK, and the US, have consistently demanded accountability and recognition of the pogrom as an act of state-sponsored genocide. Many believe that the wounds of 1984 will never heal until every perpetrator is held accountable.

    While Sajjan Kumar’s conviction was a symbolic victory, it was far from sufficient. Thousands of affected families continue to live with the trauma of 1984, knowing that many of those responsible escaped justice. The episode underscores the importance of independent investigations, judicial reforms, and political accountability to ensure that such massacres never recur.

    Sikhs worldwide continue to remember and mourn the events of 1984, keeping the memories alive through protests, literature, and advocacy. The lessons from this tragic chapter serve as a reminder that justice delayed is indeed justice denied. India must ensure that such atrocities are never repeated and that those responsible, regardless of their political stature, are held accountable in a timely manner.

    The delayed justice in the 1984 pogrom case raises critical questions about India’s legal system and political accountability. It exposes how powerful individuals can manipulate institutions to escape punishment. The lessons from 1984 are relevant even today, as instances of communal violence and political complicity continue to occur in India.

  • 37th anniversary of Operation Blue star: The game is for power not for Punjab

    37th anniversary of Operation Blue star: The game is for power not for Punjab

    Prabhjot Singh

    It was on June 1 in 1984 that the Indian armed forces launched a military action on the Golden Temple complex, allegedly to neutralize the Sikh militants led by Sant Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale. The operation lasted 10 days, resulting in the death of hundreds of innocent pilgrims inside the complex, besides extensive damage to thehighest seat of the Sikh temporal power Shri Akal Takht Sahib and the historic Ramgarhia Bungas. Indian military claimed it had lost 700 soldiers besides a few hundred wounded. -EDITOR

    The Sikhs, a global community, have every reason to nurse a grouse both against the Congress – for engineering attack on their sancta sanctorum besides depriving the State of its rightful territorial and rivers water rights – and the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) for not assuaging their hurt psyche without taking any action to mitigate it.

     

    Thirty-seven years after the traumatic Operation Blue Star, Punjabis in general and Sikhs in particular, continue to ponder what makes all ruling parties at the Centre to betray them.

     

    All agitations in this border State have ended in trading of power without anything being said about its long-standing demands, be it territorial rights, dams and water works, prime institutions and its people.

     

    Sikhs have been in the habit of hawking newspaper headlines for reasons that extend beyond the geographic boundaries of their motherland for whose independence they made nearly 80 per cent of the total sacrifices.

     

    Of late some of the world leaders while eulogizing the contributions this minute minority community has made in the Corona pandemic went to the extent of saying that there should be a gurdwara – Sikh temple – everywhere to look after the suffering humanity.

     

    It is that institution of gurdwara that has been making the Sikh community seek answers from the Central Government in India in general and the national political parties in particular.

     

    Questions about the attack on their sancta sanctorum have either been ignored or they remained mired in controversies.

     

    The Sikhs, a global community, have every reason to nurse a grouse both against the Congress – for engineering attack on their sancta sanctorum besides depriving the State of its rightful territorial and rivers water rights – and the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) for not assuaging their hurt psyche without taking any action to mitigate it.

     

    Wreaked by two politics-engineered partitions, this once affluent State continues to struggle to get its long-standing demands, including territorial sovereignty and rightful claim over its river waters, met. While the first partition in 1947 played havoc with the life and property of this border province, the second partition took away whatever little progress or gains it had made since independence. All major projects, including its capital, dams and water works and institutions, were taken away and brought under control of the Centre.

     

    It is all the more agonizing for the Sikhs when they look back at the history. Before the 1947 partition, says historian Research Professor Rajmohan Gandhi, the then British rulers tried to appease all major communities of northern India – the majority Hindu community and the minorities Muslims and the Sikhs.  Though he did not say in many words that while the Hindus got India and the Muslims Pakistan, the Sikhs had to swallow false promises.

     

    After partition, their agitation for a Sikh Homeland ended in a truncated State they got which was without a capital, most of its dams and water works and many Punjabi speaking areas.

     

    While they were still trying to come out of the trauma of the two partitions, came the Operation Blue star. Whatever are the causes or reasons behind the “Dharam Yudh” morcha that made the Sikhs launch a struggle to get autonomy for States after adopting the Sri Anandpur Sahib resolution of August 1977.

    Indian Military inside the Golden Temple.

    Agreed violence has no place in any civilized society in general and liberal democracies in particular, Punjab has never been at peace with itself for a continuous period of 30 or more years. To be precise, Sikhs have always been at war, if not with the powers at the Center, then among themselves.  And even in their struggle, political, religious or social, they have always pioneered a number of initiatives, both in and outside India. It is here where the role of journalists, as members of the fourth estate, becomes crucial in highlighting injustices done to the State or its people,

     

    Journalists are eyes and ears of a society as they play a critical role in preserving democracy. They are mandated to act as watchdogs in liberal democracies as while weaving their stories, they not only understand the importance or significance of Rule of Law but also keep the public good above everything else. While judging a journalist or his or her work, especially in the context of Punjab, it is important to understand the trying circumstances in which they worked.

     

    The State had the longest spell of President’s rule besides promulgation of draconian laws to contain militancy. A State that was once acknowledged as the sword arm or sports arm of the country besides serving as the food bowl of the country is now tottering at brink.

     

    Some experienced journalists, both from within and outside the country, would invariably use objectivity and verification combined with storytelling skills to make a subject both credible and newsworthy. But journalists from Punjab remain a suspect in the eyes f the Centre. Punjab has had more spells of curfew than any other State in the country. It is not to suggest that what a journalist writes has general acceptance. Objectivity itself is subjective. Like everything else, criticism of journalistic works often has political dividends. Increasing attacks by politicians on the credibility of a journalist or a media house have often been part of a conscious strategy to weaken both the accountability and credibility of journalism in general and a journalist in particular.

     

    Of late, we all have been a witness to a collapse of the notion that politically relevant facts can be discerned by news professionals, reiterating the general belief that journalists are no more apolitical leaving their readers uncertain about ingesting the messages communicated to them as credible. These changing perceptions and thoughts apart, there are old timers who are continuing to discharge their role as torchbearers. They religiously follow professional ethics and discharge their duties as ears and eyes of the society they represent.  Recently I reviewed a book by one of my friends, Jagtar Singh, for The Tribune, an institution with which I remained associated for 37 years.

     

    As a veteran journalist and columnist, Jagtar Singh, remained an eyewitness from the very beginning of the fight for Sikh Homeland, to the present.

     

    His latest book “The Khalistan Struggle: Rivers on Fire” is the story of militant struggle in the border state of Punjab. It tells students of history as to what sparked this struggle, which were the people in the beginning and how this discourse shaped up as a fight for a separate Sikh state.

    The Akal Takht Sahib bore the brunt of the military action.

    Not only this, several other books about the Sikh religio-political discourse in synergy of both the peaceful and militant struggle from the earlier days, have taken up only selective militant actions, as these were the incidents as these shaped the discourse at crucial moments.

     

    For Sikhs, it is not only their emotive bondage with the institution of gurdwara in general and the sanctum sanctorum in particular but has acted as a catalyst to prove to the world that the Sikh gurdwara which the Indian defence forces attacked with mortar, grenades and guns in 1984, are the shelter homes for those in distress. And these spiritual centers-cum-shelter homes do not discriminate with beneficiaries on the grounds of their ethnicity, colour, creed, religion or language. No Sikh would ever take or accept any attack 0n its place of worship.

     

    Most of those who have done work or written essays on developments in Punjab since 1947 have documented their works well.However, a few important revelations made in the book, including one about the assassination of the then Prime Minister Indira Gandhi, need corroboration. The author says that the names of all those who gunned down Indira Gandhi and those who were part of the design to kill her were in public domain. At least three more people besides all those known names were part of the plan to avenge Operation Bluster.

     

    This revelation has not been substantiated as he mentions that one of the three names – Manbir Singh Chaheru – purchased a plot in Mohali for Bimal Kaur Khalsa, wife of Delhi Police Sub Inspector Beant Singh, one of the two assassins who killed Indira Gandhi. It appears to be a post-action (assassination) association that brought Bimal Khalsa in contact with Manbir Chaheru and Damdami Taksal. All said and done, it was the religious hurt that made Beant and Satwant kill Indira Gandhi. The revelation cannot be dismissed, as corroboratory evidence may have remained unexplored.

    A picture of destruction

    Incidentally I covered most of the militant actions, including assassinations of Indira Gandhi and Beant Singh, besides Operation Bluestar, Kapuri Morcha and the Dharam Yudh morcha.

    Coming to the emotive issue of rivers’ waters, it has been proved that the State Assembly ever ratified none of these awards. The assembly took up the issue twice, first during the Akali Government of Surjit Singh Barnala that annulled the 1981 award, and the second by the Congress Government of Capt Amarinder Singh that set aside all water agreements. It may sound strange that none of these Legislative pronouncements could become effective. The issue has been once again thrown open by the Apex Court necessitating the Centre to get back to the rigmarole of holding meetings with the Chief Ministers of Punjab and Haryana.

     

    When the Barnala government annulled the 1981 award (Indira-Darbara award), the State Assembly simultaneously endorsed the Rajiv-Longowal accord that mandated for setting up of a Tribunal to resolve the waters’ sharing problem. And the Tribunal so set up – Eradi Tribunal – after submitting its interim report in 1987, failed to give its final report even after 24 years costing the state exchequer several crores.

     

    When we talk of Punjab Rivers’ waters issue, reference to Riparian principle or law becomes imminent. Going by Encyclopedia Britannica, “In property right doctrine pertaining to properties adjacent to a waterway that (a) governs the use of surface water and (b) gives all owners of land contiguous to streams, lakes, and ponds equal rights to the water, whether the right is exercised or not. The riparian right is un-sufructuary, meaning that the landowner does not own the water itself but instead enjoys a right to use the water and its surface.”

     

    Going by the basic philosophy of the Riparian Law or principle, the actual rights rest with the people who live adjacent to waterways. Intriguingly, in case of Punjab, the actual beneficiaries were uprooted and the State or the center claimed ownership rights over the waters. And select powerful people, holding high positions both in the state and the center, forget about the water awards without ever getting to the beneficiaries, the people, for their endorsement.

     

    Now coming back to the Operation Blue star, after 37 years, there is no credible or authentic version of the whole unfortunate episode that reveals actual drills of the operation, exact total casualties, the fate of the archives, artifacts, books and documents that were there in the SGPC museum damaged during the attack on Operation Blue star.

     

    Complicity of other powers, including the British government, in the events leading to the Operation Blue star, is still to be told.

     

    (Prabhjot Singh is a former Chief of Bureau of The Tribune. He can be reached at prabhjot416@gmail.com)