Delay in Justice: PUDR’s Report on the 1984 Anti-Sikh Riots

A Critical Analysis for UPSC Prelims & Mains 2026

The People’s Union for Democratic Rights (PUDR) released a report titled “Delhi 1984: A Long Aftermath”, highlighting the systemic failure of the Indian criminal justice system in delivering justice to victims of the 1984 anti-Sikh riots. Four decades after one of the most violent episodes in independent India, only a fragment of the cases have seen convictions.

This issue is crucial for UPSC because it touches multiple themes:

• Communal violence

• Human rights

• Police reforms

• Judicial delays

• Accountability mechanisms

• Mass crimes & transitional justice

---

🔥 1. Background: The 1984 Anti-Sikh Riots

• Triggered by the assassination of Prime Minister Indira Gandhi.

• Delhi witnessed widespread targeted violence against Sikhs.

• 2,756 people killed in Delhi alone.

• Systemic failure of law enforcement, mass impunity, mob violence.

The Supreme Court later described the period (1–4 November 1984) as “crimes against humanity”.

---

📝 2. Key Findings of PUDR’s Report (“Delhi 1984: A Long Aftermath”)

A. Very Low Conviction Rates

• 650 FIRs registered (post–Nanavati Commission directives).

• Only 13 cases still being heard in courts.

• 442 people convicted initially, but:

  • 89 convicted in one single case

  • 15 of those 89 later acquitted

Most convictions were for unlawful assembly or rioting, not murder.

Why so few murder convictions?

• Broken investigations

• Lost evidence

• Collusion allegations

• Witness intimidation

• Procedural flaws

---

⚖️ 3. Last High-Profile Conviction: Sajjan Kumar (2018)

The Delhi High Court convicted former Congress MP Sajjan Kumar, calling the riots:

“Crimes against humanity... that will continue to shake the collective conscience of society.”

Shows how painfully slow justice has been—34 years after the incident.

---

🕵️‍♂️ 4. Failures in Investigation: What the PUDR Found

PUDR concluded that India’s criminal justice system is not prepared for mass crimes.

Key reasons:

A. Faulty Investigation Processes

• Clubbing of unrelated cases

• Poor translation of victim affidavits

• Procedural delays

• Inadequate documentation

• Mishandled evidence

B. Failure of Commissions

Several commissions were established:

• Mismanagement

• Lack of coordination

• Political interference

• Poor follow-up on recommendations

C. Testimonies of Police–Political Collusion

Victims described:

• Police inaction

• Politicians leading mobs

• Direct orders enabling violence

• State failure to protect citizens

Despite these testimonies, accountability remains minimal.

---

🧩 5. Women’s Testimonies: The Missing Narrative

The report highlights:

• Sexual violence against Sikh women

• Lack of FIRs

• Silence due to stigma

• Police ignoring testimonies

• No justice despite clear accounts

Gendered violence has been significantly under-reported and under-investigated.

---

🏛️ 6. Structural Issues Exposed by the 1984 Riots

This case shows India’s challenges in addressing mass crimes, especially where:

• Large mobs are involved

• State machinery is complicit or passive

• Political patronage is alleged

• Victims belong to minority communities

Key structural issues:

1. Weak witness protection

2. Politicisation of police

3. Slow judiciary

4. Absence of transitional justice mechanisms

5. Lack of specialised investigation units

6. Poor forensic capabilities

---

📚 7. UPSC Prelims Points to Note

Topic	Key Fact
No. of FIRs	650
Cases still being heard	13
Total killed in Delhi	2,756
Last major conviction	Sajjan Kumar (2018)
Report released by	People’s Union for Democratic Rights (PUDR)
Name of report	Delhi 1984: A Long Aftermath
Key Commission	Nanavati Commission

---

📝 8. Mains GS-II/III Answer Writing Angles

A. Human Rights & Constitutional Obligations

• Articles 14, 21, 25

• State duty to protect minorities

• Failure of equal protection

B. Policing & Administrative Reform

• Need for independent police force

• Implementation of Prakash Singh reforms

• Accountability mechanisms for police inaction

C. Judicial Reform

• Fast-track courts

• Dedicated special courts for mass crimes

• Avoiding procedural delays

D. Transitional Justice

• Truth-telling mechanisms

• Reparations

• Victim-centric approach

E. Political Accountability

• Need for independent investigation

• Conflict-of-interest checks

• Criminal liability of public officials

---

🌐 9. Comparative Insight for Value Addition

In countries like:

• South Africa (Truth and Reconciliation Commission)

• Rwanda (Gacaca courts)
  Mechanisms were created specifically to address mass crimes and ethnic violence.

India lacks a comparable framework.

---

🏁 10. Conclusion

The PUDR report underscores the deep gaps in India’s justice delivery system in cases of communal violence and mass crimes. Four decades after the massacre, victims continue to await closure.

For UPSC aspirants, this topic is a powerful case study to illustrate:

• Police and judicial reforms

• Human rights failures

• Need for accountability

• Weaknesses in mass crime investigation

• Constitutional responsibilities of the State

It also connects strongly with GS-I (communalism), GS-II (governance), GS-III (internal security), Ethics (empathy, justice) and Essay.