1984 Delhi Sikh Genocide - Affidavits

Affidavit submitted before the Misra Commission

I, Brijit Singh S/o Late S. Achal Singh, aged 52 yrs. at presently residing at A-174, Defence Colony, Meerut, do hereby solemnly affirm and state as under: -

1. That the deponent alongwith his mother Sunder Kaur and two brothers S. Diljit Singh and Dr. Harjit Singh tenants in house No. 451, Double Storey, New Rajinder Nagar, New Delhi. The landlord of the house in question Purshottam Bhatia has filed a case for eviction which is pending in the court of Rent Controller, Delhi.

2. That the house in question was being used for residence by all the tenants jointly or severally depending upon the place of posting of the deponent and his brothers.

3. That at present the deponent is posted as Divisional Manager, Life Insurance Corp. of India, and posted at Meerut. The eldest brother Diljit Singh who is in Indian Foreign Service is at present posted in Ghana and the youngest brother Dr. Harjit Singh who is a permanent employee of Haryana Govt. is at present on deputation in Libya.

4. That Sunder Kaur mother of the deponent who was normally residing in the house went to Patiala on 27-10-84, to visit some relations.

5. That all belonging of Diljit Singh and Dr. Harjit Singh were left in the house on their posting abroad. Some things belonging to deponent as well as his mother were also left in the house.

6. That the deponent received intimation that house had been looted during the riots in Delhi following unfortunate assassination of Indira Gandhi. The deponent came to Delhi and lodged a report with Rajinder Nagar P.S. on 16-11-84 and 17-11-84. (Photocopies enclosed). (Photographs showing condition of the house after the looting also enclosed). The reports had been lodged on the basis of the information gathered by the deponent on making enquiries from the neighbourhood. When the deponent went to P.S. for lodging report he was told, "it is all false, no such incident has taken place in our area", without even listening to full facts or verifying the same. Ram Chander ASI visited the spot and questioned some of the neighbours.

7. That this report appears to have been tagged with general riots case and no further action appear to have been taken.

8. That the deponent on independent enquiries learnt that a Haryana Roadways bus of Chandigarh Depot carrying some 20-25 young men armed with iron rods was involved in this incident. Enquiries further revealed that probably the number of the bus was HYR 1285. This information was passed on to police authorities.

9. That the Police enquiries in this regard revealed that Haryana Roadways bus bearing No. HYE 1285 which left Delhi for Chandigarh on 1-11-84 had been hijacked on Delhi border and recovered after a few days.

10. That simply because the number turned out to be HYE 1285 instead of HYR 1285 the police authorities do not seem to have made any further enquiries. Even the fact that this is the only house in the locality being looted did not stir the police to action to find out the real culprits.

11. That the deponent pleaded with the police authorities that some local man was involved in the looting and somebody inimical to deponent's family had managed the looting. The deponent also mentioned that labourer's working in landlord's saree printing workshop on the ground floor (Flat No.452) should be questioned in this regard. But the police authorities appear to have believed the landlord that no such workshop was being run in flat No.452 and have not ascertained the names of such persons leave aside questioning them. The Deponent reasserts that on 27-10-84, when deponent's mother left the house in question some 6 – 8 persons were working in flat No. 452.

12. That probably encouraged by the Police response, the same group of people appear to have struck again around General Elections' time when the atmosphere was again tense and movement of Sikhs was restricted. On one of the visits to the house in question the deponent found the house broken open for the second time and entire household goods removed. Inquiries revealed that luggage was taken away in a truck sometimes in the end of December, 1984. A report to this effect was lodged on 17.1.1985 with Rajinder Nagar Police Station which was registered as FIR No.34 (copy enclosed) MS Grewal, ASI, visited the spot. Some photographs were taken and finger prints lifted by the crime squad. One of the ladies in the neighbourhood admitted having even noted the truck number but did not remember it.

13. That the deponent got the doors etc. set right and left the house duly locked on 6.2.1985. On his next visit on 14.2.1985, the deponent again found the locks of the house broken open, even though there was practically nothing which could be stolen. It was merely to harass and terrorize the deponent. A report was lodged with Rajinder Nagar Police Station (Photo copy enclosed).

14. That the Police authorities again told the deponent that they did not believe in these incidents and said that deponent was the Prime Suspect in this case. Instead of conducting the investigations on proper lines they have been conducting the enquires against the deponent only. In the process they have conducted search of the house of deponent as well as the house in Patiala where mother of the deponent had gone. (Copies of search memo enclosed).

15. That on practically all visits of the deponent to the Police Station he was questioned as to why the house in question was retained by the family; as to why all this luggage was kept there; as to why the house was needed now and why it could not be surrendered to the landlord; why on a particular date of hearing in the eviction case the deponent did not attend the court etc. This clearly shows a bias of the police authorities who were not prepared to give justice to the deponent and his family and no action has till date been taken in pursuance of the complaint by the deponent.

Back to Affidavits list

Guide To Discover Sikhism |   Guide To Becoming A Pure Sikh|   Guide To Carrying Out Nitnem