Political parties in Punjab, including the Shiromani Akali Dal (SAD) and the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP), are adding fuel to the fire ignited more than three decades ago.
While SAD and AAP staged protest dharnas and hunger strike, respectively, on Thursday on the issue of 1984 anti-Sikh riots, Punjab Congress chief Capt Amarinder Singh tried to douse the flames by saying that protective cover was never provided by him.
lashing out at the SAD and AAP for “politicising” the sensitive issues for “electoral gains”, Capt Amarinder reiterated his stand that the name of Jagdish Tytler was not taken by any of the riots victims during his interaction with them at that time, except the five names including lalit Maken, Dharamdutt Shastri, HKl Bhagat, Arjun Das, and Sajjan Kumar.
“It was only after six months when Tytler was contesting parliamentary polls against Madan lal Khurana that he took his name for his involvement in riots,” said Capt Amarinder.
The former chief minister did not mince a word to attack the SAD and AAP leaders for taking political mileage from the sensitive issue like this “only when election nears”.
“(Punjab Chief Minister Parkash Singh) Badal is in power since 10 years, why he didn’t think of it earlier. AAP is also in power in Delhi since two years, why are they raising this issue only when elections are just months away,” said Capt Amarinder.
He said: “The matter is subjudice, and it is the Court to decide who is guilty.”
On the other hand, AAP on Thursday set 15-day deadline for Capt Amarinder to “apologise” for shielding the accused.
Observing one day fast as a mark of protest to seek justice for 1984 Sikh genocide victims at Mohali, AAP sought apology from Capt Amarinder within 15 days “failing which he would face demonstration all across Punjab”.
Demanding apology from Capt Amarinder Singh in lok Sabha within 15 days, AAP convener Gurpreet Singh Waraich (Ghuggi) said that he must apologise for shielding the culprits within 15 days or “AAP will decide gherao Captain with the victim families”.
Accusing SAD, Ghuggi said that it never opposed the move of Narendra Modi Government to jolt the SIT appointed by AAP Delhi Government.
Senior advocate and AAP leader HS Phoolka criticised Punjab Congress chief Capt Amarinder Singh for favouring Jagdish Tytler, Sajjan Kumar, Kamal Nath and other Congress leaders in the matter.
Terming Capt Amarinder the “traitor of Sikhs”, Phoolka said that almost all inquiry commissions appointed to probe the Sikh genocide have clearly mentioned the names of these three Congress leaders for their role in the massacre of Sikh masses.
Phoolka said that Tytler’s name appeared in most of the national newspapers on November 5, 1984, as one who led the mobs against the Sikhs. “It is absolutely wrong for Capt Amarinder to say that Tytler's name came up only during Madan lal Khurana's elections in New Delhi,” he added.
He said that the opposition parties like SAD, BJP and Congress were misleading people that AAP was raising 1984 issue to mint votes, “but the fact is that AAP leaders including me and Jarnail Singh and others, are fighting for the cause even before we joined politics”.
“The Almighty has assigned me the duty to raise the voice of unheard and I would continue to do it till my last breath,” said Phoolka.
Jarnail Singh said that on the issue of 1984, SAD-BJP alliance is hand in glove with Congress as the leaders of these parties shielded culprits collectively. He accused the SAD leaders of Delhi for pressurising the eye witnesses in the case to draw statements against Congress leaders.
Accusing that the SAD-BJP alliance Government has stooped so low that the funds assigned for 1984 massacre were embezzled by its leaders, Jarnail Singh demanded a CBI probe in the case.
Jarnail Singh also challenged Capt Amarinder for a live debate on the issue saying that Amarinder would never accept it as he knows that he is on the receiving end on the issue.
Sangrur MP Bhagwant Mann, dubbing Capt Amarinder as ‘mentally bankrupt leader’ for asking people to forget the massacre of 1984, said that he would raise the issue in the ensuing session of the Parliament.