ID :
40951
Fri, 01/16/2009 - 11:18
Auther :
Shortlink :
http://m.oananews.org//node/40951
The shortlink copeid
Witness in US against Tytler not reliable: CBI
New Delhi, Jan 15 (PTI) India's premier investigating agency CBI feels the two witnesses examined by its team in the United States in connection with the 1984 anti-Sikh riots were not credible enough and failed to give any proof linking former Union Minister Jagdish Tytler to the rioters.
Jasbir Singh, who was examined by a Central Bureau of
Investigation (CBI) team in San Fransisco, gave details of his
movement between November 1 to 3, 1984, in which he named one
Sucha Singh, a resident of Delhi University area, as the
person who had given him shelter from the mob. Singh had given
the age of Sucha Singh as 65 and said he owned a two-room
house.
However, the CBI found out Sucha Singh was a resident
near Ludlow Castle school and he denied having provided
shelter to anyone. He also told the CBI that he had a
seven-room ancestral house and not as stated by the witness.
His statement was recorded under Section 161 Criminal
Procedure Code at the Indian mission in San Fransisco.
Another witness Jasbinder Singh was examined by CBI at
the Indian Mission in New York who could not give any fresh
detail to the agency sleuths.
He told the CBI that he was hiding along with two
"sevadars" (volunteers) and "Ragi" (who sings morning prayers)
but failed to provide the name of the three people for
independent verification of his statement.
The CBI, in its report to the court, concluded that the
two witnesses could not be relied on.
CBI had earlier this year issued notices to Singh under
Section 160 of the CrPC (Criminal Procedure Code), which
empowers the probe agency to seek the presence of a witness.
Singh, through his lawyers, had urged the Delhi High
Court to quash the notice for his presence issued by CBI
expressing apprehension that there was danger to his life in
case he visits India for recording his testimony.
CBI had on September 29, 2007, filed an affidavit in a
court here seeking the closure of case against Tytler on the
plea that Singh was untraceable.
However, Singh surfaced immediately after this through
telephonic interviews with television channels prompting the
court to reject the closure report in the case besides
directing the CBI to examine them. PTI SKL
Jasbir Singh, who was examined by a Central Bureau of
Investigation (CBI) team in San Fransisco, gave details of his
movement between November 1 to 3, 1984, in which he named one
Sucha Singh, a resident of Delhi University area, as the
person who had given him shelter from the mob. Singh had given
the age of Sucha Singh as 65 and said he owned a two-room
house.
However, the CBI found out Sucha Singh was a resident
near Ludlow Castle school and he denied having provided
shelter to anyone. He also told the CBI that he had a
seven-room ancestral house and not as stated by the witness.
His statement was recorded under Section 161 Criminal
Procedure Code at the Indian mission in San Fransisco.
Another witness Jasbinder Singh was examined by CBI at
the Indian Mission in New York who could not give any fresh
detail to the agency sleuths.
He told the CBI that he was hiding along with two
"sevadars" (volunteers) and "Ragi" (who sings morning prayers)
but failed to provide the name of the three people for
independent verification of his statement.
The CBI, in its report to the court, concluded that the
two witnesses could not be relied on.
CBI had earlier this year issued notices to Singh under
Section 160 of the CrPC (Criminal Procedure Code), which
empowers the probe agency to seek the presence of a witness.
Singh, through his lawyers, had urged the Delhi High
Court to quash the notice for his presence issued by CBI
expressing apprehension that there was danger to his life in
case he visits India for recording his testimony.
CBI had on September 29, 2007, filed an affidavit in a
court here seeking the closure of case against Tytler on the
plea that Singh was untraceable.
However, Singh surfaced immediately after this through
telephonic interviews with television channels prompting the
court to reject the closure report in the case besides
directing the CBI to examine them. PTI SKL
