Delay of 27 Years in Appeal against Acquittal, not Condonable even if it relates to 1984 Sikh Riots, Read HC Order

The Delhi High Court, in strict terms, has refused to condone the prolonged delay of not less than 27 years in filing of appeal against acquittal of various accused related to the infamous anti-sikh riots of 1984.

The division bench of Justice Suresh Kumar Kait and Justice Neena Bansal Krishna to this account invoked a famous American short story 'Rip Van Winkle' (a Dutch-American villager who sleeps through the American Revolution) to dismiss the appeal filed against the Order of acquittal dating back to 1995.

"Indisputably the accused were acquitted as the witnesses produced during the evidence by the prosecution were not found believable vide judgment dated 29.04.1995. If the prosecution or the complainant were aggrieved by the judgment of acquittal, there was nothing which prevented them from filing the Appeal," the court said.

The Court wasn't impressed with the reason for delay provided by the prosecution which they cited as the opinion given by SIT in its Report, that the Trial Court could not have taken a view of weakness of the prosecution case merely due to delay in recording of FIR or delay in recording the statements of the witnesses.

"The delay in recording of FIR was obvious as the State was not interested in recording the FIRs. During the riots more than 3000 Sikhs were killed and only few cases were registered in respect of these gruesome murders, large scale burning and looting. The witnesses had deposed that their complaints were not being recorded by the police. Hence, an Appeal may be preferred against acquittal in FIR No.501/1992," the court affirmed.

"It was not disputed on behalf of the State that no further investigations have been carried out by the Investigating Agencies and no fresh material in respect of the alleged offences, has been placed on record. There is no explanation as to why the State or the complainant did not file the appeal on the grounds that were available even at the time of acquittal. The reason now been given is the findings by the SIT, but the SIT has observed that the reason for disbelieving the witnesses on account of the delay of FIR, was not correct. It is evident that the grounds of appeal which are now been agitated are purely on the merits of the case which existed even at the time of trial and consequent acquittal,"  the court added.

Stating that in the present case, Rip Van Winklian Slumber has extended to more than 27 years and there is no explanation for this inordinate delay and the grounds taken by the State are not justifiable, the court dismissed the application.

"Though delay is claimed to be of about 274 days, but in fact the delay is of more than 27 years for which there is no explanation worth a say. Pertinently, the Report was given by SIT on 15.04.2019 but even thereafter it is claimed that there is a delay of about 274 days. The claim of delay of 274 days is also erroneous since the judgment of acquittal was penned in 1995 as already mentioned above. The delay of 274 days is alleged from the date or Report of SIT in 2019, but even thereafter the Leave Petition has been filed after almost four years. There is no explanation whatsoever to explain the delay after the Report of SIT, even if for the sake of argument it is accepted that new grounds for filing the Leave had emerged. The only explanation given for filing the present Leave in 2023 i.e. after four years that it took some time for the office to finalize the Leave which again reflects the non-seriousness and the reluctance of the prosecution to file the appeal. It has been erroneously claimed that the delay was of 274 days, when in fact the delay is of more than 27 years for which there is absolutely no explanation," the court remarked.

Read Order @LatestLaws.com:

Picture Source :