Kamal Nath to join BJP? The 1984 Sikh riots allegations that have dogged the Congress veteran

Speculations are rife that Congress veteran Kamal Nath, 77, and his son Nakul, 49, are about to join the BJP.

Over the years, however, Nath has been frequently targeted by the BJP over a number of issues, not least over his alleged role in the 1984 anti-Sikh pogrom. Here’s a recall.

When a ‘big tree falling’ shook Delhi

Prime Minister Indira Gandhi was gunned down by her two Sikh bodyguards on October 31, 1984, purportedly to avenge Operation Blue Star that took place in June of that year.

Also in Explained | RLD ditches INDIA for NDA: What this means for the party, the two alliances

What followed was carnage — over the next three days, Delhi burnt as close to 3,000 innocent Sikhs were killed by mobs seeking vengeance. Not only were Congress party leaders accused of instigating violence and leading mobs, there was also the alleged use of state machinery to identify and target innocent Sikhs.

Kamal Nath, and the violence at Gurdwara Rakab Ganj

On November 1, a mob of nearly 4,000 surrounded Gurdwara Rakab Ganj, at the heart of New Delhi, right next to Parliament building.

“… the mob at Rakab Ganj Gurdwara laid siege to it for at least five hours, indulging in various forms of violence. It pelted stones at the Sikhs inside the gurdwara. It flung burning rags doused with petrol,” Manoj Mitta and H S Phoolka wrote in When a Tree Shook Delhi (2007), their detailed account of the violence and its aftermath.

“In what was the worst of all its crimes on the spot, the mob killed two Sikhs,” they wrote. The two men, father and son, were burnt alive by the raging mob at the gate of the gurdwara, while the police allegedly refused to act.

Kamal Nath, at the time an up and coming Congress leader, was present at the spot. “Kamal Nath’s presence at the site of violence was confirmed by two of the senior-most police officers, Commissioner Subhash Tandan, and Additional Commissioner Gautam Kaul, as also by an independent source, The Indian Express reporter, Sanjay Suri,” Mittal and Phoolka wrote.

In a 2015 interview to The Indian Express, Suri described the scene outside Rakab Ganj in detail: “When I went to Rakabganj Gurdwara, there were crowds outside and they were surging. Two Sikhs had already been burnt alive. I saw a crowd on the road surging again and again towards the gurdwara. By the side of this crowd was Kamal Nath. The crowd moved forward, he raised his hand and they stopped. You could see this two ways — he stopped the crowd. My question is — what is the relationship between him and them that he had only to raise his hand and they stopped?”

Subsequent investigations and ‘exoneration’

Despite his confirmed presence at the site, no FIR was registered against Kamal Nath, and investigations glossed over his role. Justice Ranganath Misra Commission, which conducted an inquiry into the violence in 1985, gave a clean chit to all senior Congress leaders, including Nath.

Nath’s name would, however, come up in the investigations of the Justice Nanavati Commission (2000-04). Appearing before the Commission, Nath admitted his presence but denied Suri’s allegations that he had any “control” over the mob. In fact, he told the Commission that “while he was near the Gurudwara, he had tried to persuade the crowd to disperse and not to take law into their hands.” He left the scene after the arrival of the Commissioner of Police, “satisfied that police would be able to control the situation” (according to the Nanavati Commission’s summary of Kamal Nath’s affidavit).

Ultimately, the Commission was unable to indict Kamal Nath. “In absence of better evidence it is not possible for the Commission to say that he had in any manner instigated the mob or that he was involved in the attack on the Gurudwara,” the Nanavati Commission report said.

Kamal Nath has long claimed that he was “completely absolved” by the Nanavati Commission. But, as Mitta and Phoolka pointed out, the Nanavati Commission “only gave him the benefit of the doubt. And it did so mainly on two grounds.”

First, was the sheer amount of time that had passed since the incident, which the Commission held was “probably for that reason he was not able to give more details as regards when and how he went there and what he did”. Second, somewhat ironically, was Sanjay Suri’s testimony. “Shri Suri has said that Shri Kamal Nath had tried to persuade the mob to disperse and the mob had retreated for some time,” the Commission held.

However, according to Mitta and Phoolka, “That was a selective reading of Suri’s evidence”.

For the latest news from across India, Political updates, Explainers, Sports News, Opinion, Entertainment Updates and more Top News, visit Indian Express. Subscribe to our award-winning Newsletter Download our App here Android & iOS