Justice Nanavati’s Interview With Rajdeep Sardesai

In Justice Nanavati’s recorded talk with Shri Rajdeep Sardesai, Chairman of IBN News Channel about Shri Tytler’s role in the 1984 Riots, he never said that there was any Substantial Evidence found against him. The recorded footage serves as the evidence.

Quoting Justice Nanavati, “Jagdish Tytler falls into another category, because evidence against him is not that strong….”

And yet the IBN new channel indulged in spreading rumours that the Justice Nanavati Commission found “Substantial Evidence against Shri Tytler!

Apparently, IBN seemed more interested in increasing the TRP (Television Rating Points)of their news rather than in roviding the true news to the public.
Out of this foul cry, the question arises: Is it human to destroy someone’s hard-earned reputation just to increase the TRP of a channel?

There are many articles and books written by lawyers, historians, and many others about the ’84 Riots. Many different political leaders have also written on this subject, but not one of them has mentioned Shri Tytler’s name with authentic, documentary of physical proofs by truthful witness witnesses.

There is a “Black Book” called which very authentically described the ’84 riots. This was written jointly by PUCL (People’s Union for Civil Liberties) and PUDR (People’s Union for Democratic Rights); where they had authentically stated that Shri Tytler barged into the Office of the Commissioner of Police inbetween a press conference and accused the Police for hampering his relief work. In a very unjust, mischievous, fraudulent twist, a concocted story was planted that Shri Tytler had gone to the Police Commissioner with a completely different motive.

It is on record that Shri Tytler was involved in the relief work and the Police Commissioner was not co-operating with him. It was normal under those circumstances for anyone to barge in between a press conference or anything else of more importance. Unfortunately, the relief work done by Shri Tytler was kept in oblivion in order to harm his promising political career.

A single statement by a journalist which may or maynot be true, ignited countless conspiracies and theories worth questioning of authenticity. People started talking foul about Shri Tytler for pressurizing the Police for release work. On the other hand, he was blaming the Police for not co-operating in his relief work. People chose to believe what a single person out of the 15 member press conference had to say about him, even though, the report itself tells a different story.

The page 12 of the black book which gives the details of the leaders for pressurizing policeman does not include Shri Tytler’s name at all. Thus, It is highly ridiculous that people still chose to link Shri Tytler with the 1984 riots just because a single person gave a statement(?) about him.

Just go through the PUCL and PUDR report once again. Read page 12 carefully where the report speaks about the leaders pressurizing police.

Role Of BJP Government In 1984 Riots
The Nanavati Commission received/collected 3,752 affidavits. It should be noted that nearly 3,083 affidavits were against the Sikhs. Even before the Nanavati Commission, the BJP Government whic

Justice Nanavati’s Interview With Rajdeep Sardesai
In Justice Nanavati’s recorded talk with Shri Rajdeep Sardesai, Chairman of IBN News Channel about Shri Tytler’s role in the 1984 Riots, he never said that there was any Substantial Evide

The PUCL And PUDR Report On Leaders Pressurizing Police Did Not Name Mr. Jagdish Tytler
Can anyone find my name here? Is it not ridiculous that people are not talking about the actual report but are blaming me just because one person misinterpreted my statement? Friends, I strongly

My Resignation
After almost sixteen years of the massacre, the Justice Nanavati Commission indicted Shri Tytler by using the rather unfortunate phrase “probably.” The Akali Party and the BJP got together whe

CBI Investigation
Because of political pressures, the case was referred to the CBI with instructions to investigate if the two affidavits lodged by Sardar Jasbir Singh and Sardar Surender Singh were true or false.

In The Court Of Sh. Sanjiv Jain Acmm: Karkardooma Court
S. Jasbir Singh in his affidavit dt. 31/08/2000 before the Commission had averred that he had overheard Jagdish Tytler rebuking his men on the night of 3/11/1984, near the T.B. Hospital for

CBI Vs Suresh Kumar Panewala
It is stated in the Court Order that investigation has been conducted taking into account all the angles including conspiracy, the efforts were made to join the witnesses. Only one wit

Copy Of RTI From Alok Kumar, DCP Central Zone
It would be pertinent to draw attention to the fact that S. Jasbir Singh was involved in the above case for the reason of attacking and threatening, beating and mal-treating the victims of the