‘There was fire everywhere’: 1984 riot survivors recall the horror after Sajjan Kumar’s death

The death of Sajjan Kumar in April 2024 marks the end of a 42-year-long quest for justice for the victims of the 1984 anti-Sikh riots, one of the darkest chapters in post-independence India. To understand the gravity of this moment, we must travel back to October 31, 1984, when Prime Minister Indira Gandhi was assassinated by her two Sikh bodyguards in retaliation for Operation Blue Star — the military action ordered by her government in June 1984 to flush out militants from the Golden Temple in Amritsar. In the days that followed, organized mobs, allegedly led by Congress leaders including Sajjan Kumar, Jagdish Tytler, and H.K.L. Bhagat, unleashed targeted violence against Sikhs across Delhi, Kanpur, Bokaro, and other cities. Official estimates place the death toll at over 3,000, though civil society groups argue the number is significantly higher. The violence was not spontaneous; it bore the hallmarks of state complicity — voter lists were used to identify Sikh homes, police remained passive, and curfews were imposed only after the killing had peaked. Sajjan Kumar, a three-time Congress MP from Outer Delhi, was accused of instigating mobs in the Sultanpuri-Mangolpuri area. For decades, he evaded accountability due to political protection and institutional inertia. The turning point came with the Nanavati Commission (2000–2005), headed by Justice G.T. Nanavati, which explicitly indicted Kumar and others for "abetting and instigating" the violence. Based on its findings, the CBI filed a chargesheet in 2010 under IPC Sections 302 (murder), 120B (criminal conspiracy), 147 (rioting), and 149 (unlawful assembly). After a protracted trial, the Delhi High Court convicted Kumar in December 2018, sentencing him to life imprisonment — a rare instance of a sitting or former MP being held criminally liable for communal violence. The Supreme Court upheld the conviction in 2022, rejecting his appeal and affirming that "the rule of law must prevail over political influence." This case carries profound constitutional significance. It reinforces Article 14 (equality before law) and Article 21 (protection of life and personal liberty), affirming that no individual, regardless of political stature, is above the law. The conviction also underscores the judiciary’s role as a guardian of minority rights under Articles 25–30, particularly in the context of communal violence. Moreover, it highlights the systemic failure of the criminal justice system — delayed FIRs, destroyed evidence, and witness intimidation — which allowed perpetrators to roam free for decades. The 2018 judgment set a critical precedent for future cases involving political accountability in mass violence, including the 2002 Gujarat riots and 2020 Delhi riots. Socially, the case reopened deep wounds within the Sikh community, many of whom view the 1984 violence as a state-sponsored pogrom rather than a "riot." The mixed reactions to Kumar’s death — relief among some survivors, anger among others that he escaped the death penalty — reflect the unresolved trauma and the perception that justice was incomplete. Politically, the case has been a recurring flashpoint in Punjab and national elections, with parties like the Shiromani Akali Dal and AAP demanding accountability, while the Congress has struggled to reconcile its past. Internationally, the 1984 riots have been cited in human rights reports by Amnesty International and the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom, affecting India’s global image on minority rights. Looking ahead, the legal closure of Kumar’s case does not equate to societal closure. The demand for a truth and reconciliation commission, reparations for victims, and prosecution of other accused — including Jagdish Tytler, whose trial is ongoing — remains alive. For aspirants, this case is a masterclass in the intersection of constitutional law, criminal justice reform, communal politics, and transitional justice — themes that are central to understanding modern India’s democratic resilience and its fractures.