SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Del) 604

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD, HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR, JJ.
 
Court On Its Own Motion – Petitioner
Versus
Mahender Singh Manan & Ors. – Respondents
Crl. Rev. P. 248 of 2017
Decided On : 11-08-2025
 
 

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Mr. Sumeet Verma, Senior Advocate (Amicus Curiae) with Mr. Mahinder Pratap Singh, Mr. Bikas Kumar Jha, Advocates.
For the Respondents:Mr. Ashneet Singh, APP, Mr. H.S. Phoolka, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Gurbaksh Singh, Ms. Surpreet Kaur and Ms. Kmna Vohra, Advocates, Ms. Tarannum Cheema, Mr. Akash Singh and Mr. Akshay N., Advocates.

The Court determined that the right to compensation under Section 357A of the CrPC is prospective and cannot be applied retroactively, thus affecting claims for incidents occurring before its enactment.

Headnote:This judgment examines the Criminal Revision Petition emanating from FIR No. 416/1984 concerning widespread riots in Delhi in 1984. The Court found previous acquittals unsustainable and called for a retrial. Key aspects include the application of Section 357A of the CrPC regarding victim compensation and its retrospective implications. The Court ruled that compensation schemes cannot be applied retrospectively, hence not allowing further compensation in this case. The final order confirms the revision petition’s disposal with specific guidelines for future claims.

Table of Content
1. overview of the case and initiation of proceedings by the court. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4)

JUDGMENT :

HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR, J.

1. The present Criminal Revision Petition was instituted in the Suo Moto exercise of powers under Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, [CrPC], pursuant to the Order dated 29.03.2017 passed by this Court. This Court, on prima facie assessment, found that the Judgment dated 04.08.1986 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, New Delhi, [Ld. ASJ] in Sessions Case No. 33/86 titled as State vs. Mahender Singh Manan & Ors, was unsustainable. The Ld. ASJ, by the said judgement, acquitted the two accused persons in the case of the alleged killing of one Shri Avtar Singh, a Sikh, during the riots which ensued in Delhi in the year 1984, in the aftermath of the assassination of Mrs. Indira Gandhi, former Prime Minister of India.

BRIEF FACTS:

2. The assassination of Mrs. Indira Gandhi, former Prime Minister of India, in the year 1984, culminated in widespread riots in the entire city of Delhi. A devastating result of which, inter alia, was the death of several innocent Sikhs and the destruction of properties belonging to Sikh families and the Gurudwaras in the Raj Nagar Area.

3. The present Criminal Revision Petition arises out of the FIR No. 416/1984 dated 04.11.1984, registered at Police Station, Delhi Cantonment. The said FIR was registered at the instance of one Mrs. Baljit Kaur, [Complainant/Respondent No. 4], daughter of late Shri Avtar Singh. Late Shri Avtar Singh, was working as an Upper Division Clerk in the Accounts Office of the Air Force at Dhaula Kuan.

4. The Complainant, in her complaint, stated that, on 01.11.1984, around 3:30 PM, a mob consisting of approximately 400-500 people came to her residence and broke down and set fire to the house door. Thereafter, the mob proceeded to hit the parents of the Complainantwith bricks. She stated that the mob left only after her father lost consciousness, believing that her father had passed away. The mob continued to visit the Complainant‟s house approximately 5-6 times and assaulted the Complainant‟s parents. However, on the seventh visit, the mob spotted the father of the Complainant. It is stated that the father of the Complainant had become mona sardar, that is, his hair had been trimmed/shaved, and upon seeing the same, certain rioters left the instance, stating that “he had become a Hindu” and should be spared.

5. The Complainant alleged that one Mahender Singh Sharabi, who was their neighbour, identified her father and attacked him with an Axe (phersa). Pursuant to which, other rioters also attacked the father of the Complainant. The Complainant stated that as a result of the beating, her father's brain matter had come out of the skull; however, he was still breathing when the rioters poured petrol on him and set him on fire. The Complainant further stated that these persons had removed the handle of the hand-pump and taken it away with them, so that the fire could not be extinguished. As a result, the Complainant‟s father was completely burnt. Thereafter, the Complainant, with her brother, went to Subroto Park Air Force Camp to seek refuge.

6. An FIR No. 416/1984 was registered at the instance of the Complainant on 04.11.1984, which has led to Session Case No. 33/86, which gave rise to the present Criminal Revision Petition.

7. Several other complaints were received regarding the murders of innocent Sikhs and the destruction of properties in the Raj Nagar area after the registration of the said FIR. A composite challan had been filed inter alia in all the aforesaid complaints, ultimately giving rise to various Sessions Cases, including the said Session Case No. 33/86. It is pertinent to mention that all the Sessions Cases were tried separately, and the accused person in the present case was acquitted by the Ld. Additional Sessions Judge, New Delhi, vide Judgment dated 04.10.1986 in Session Case No. 33/86, titled as S



Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top