An interim bail-plea filed by former Congress leader and 1984 anti-Sikh massacre convict Sajjan Kumar was rejected by the Supreme Court today. Sajjan Kumar is serving a life sentence in Tihar jail since he was convicted the case by Delhi High Court. Kumar’s lawyer Vikas Singh had sought the interim on medical grounds claiming that his client had spent 20 months in jail had lost significant weight. However, his claim was countered by Senior Counsel H S Phoolka who was appearing for the victims of the riots. Phoolka cited the medical records to show that Kumar had in fact gained weight. “This is not a small case, we are not granting you bail at all”, the court said.
The court refused to grant bail on the ground that the medical reports showed that Kumar did not need hospitalisation. Singh also appealed before the Bench consisting of the CJI Bobde and Justices A S Bopanna and V Ramasubramanian to consider the bail plea on the merits. He contended that the decision of the High Court was faulty. “The witnesses disposition was completely reversed in the High Court and the Trial Court”, Singh said. Responding to Singh’s contention, the court noted that it was not inclined to hear the case on merits at this stage. The court added that the appeal against the judgment of the High Court would be heard when the court will reopen for physical hearing.
Earlier Bail Pleas
Kumar was convicted by the Delhi High Court in 2018 and was ordered to surrender within three days of the passing of judgment. This is the third time when Kumar had pleaded before the Supreme Court to grant him bail. He had filed a similar petition before the Supreme Court in February this year seeking interim bail for private medical treatment. However, his plea was dismissed by the court. Thereafter, he filed another plea before the Supreme Court in the month of May seeking the same relief. At that time, the Supreme Court refused to hear his bail plea and deferred the hearing for a later date. “We will consider your bail application in July, not now, sorry”, the court said.
