New Delhi, Feb 17 (Reporter) The Delhi Police on Monday informed the Supreme Court that it would be filing Special Leave Petitions (SLPs) in six cases where the accused in the 1984 Anti-Sikh Riots were acquitted. A bench comprising Justice A.S. Oka and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan was hearing an Article 32 petition filed by S. Gurlad Singh Kahlon in 2016. In response to the petition, the Supreme Court constituted a committee led by Justice S.N. Dhingra in 2018 to examine riot cases. In January 2020, the Dhingra Committee submitted its report, stating that investigations in several riot cases had been derailed and recommended filing appeals against acquittals. However, while the Delhi Police did file appeals, the Delhi High Court dismissed them on grounds of delay. The Supreme Court was informed that eight appeals had been filed before the Delhi High Court, challenging the acquittals in the riots cases. SLPs were already filed in two cases, and now, the Additional Solicitor General (ASG) Aishwarya Bhati assured the Court that SLPs for the remaining six cases would also be filed. Taking note of the submissions, the Supreme Court passed the order that the "SLP will be filed by the State of Delhi in the following six cases. Considering that this bench is seized of WP 9/2016, the SLP shall be placed before the Chief Justice of India, seeking administrative directions for tagging those SLPs along with the present writ petition." The Court further directed the Delhi government to ensure that the SLPs are filed within six weeks. Senior Advocate H.S. Phoolka and AOR Amrit Singh Bedi, representing the petitioners, pointed out a crucial judgment by Justice S. Muralidhar of the Delhi High Court, which had observed that there was a "great cover-up" in the 1984 riot cases, with the State failing to prosecute the cases properly. The petitioners argued that this judgment was not placed before the Delhi High Court during the appeals. They also alleged that, In one murder case, out of 56 accused, charges were framed against only five, while 51 were discharged. In several cases of murder and gang rapes, no trial took place due to closure reports filed by investigating agencies. Senior Advocate H.S. Phoolka and Bedi submitted that the prosecution was complicit in shielding the accused. They highlighted findings from High Court judgments, arguing, "These judgments show how the investigation and prosecution were hand in glove with the accused. These were not normal cases; the trials were sham trials, the investigations were sham investigations, and the prosecutors intentionally weakened cases to protect the accused." The petitioners also requested the Supreme Court to consider additional cases beyond the 186 riot cases identified by the Dhingra Committee. They sought permission to present more criminal cases related to the riots if the bench allowed it. "Once my lords decide whether to restrict the scope to 183/186 cases, we can file the other cases," the counsel submitted. The Supreme Court also addressed delays in the disposal of Suo Motu criminal revision petitions by the Delhi High Court in four cases. The bench directed the Registrar General of the High Court to submit a status report on the pending matters. Acknowledging the efforts of Justice S.N. Dhingra, the Supreme Court formally dissolved the Dhingra Committee. The Court commended his role, stating, "We compliment the efforts taken by Justice Dhingra and the role played by him." With the Supreme Court closely monitoring the case, the filing of SLPs in the acquittals of riot-accused is expected to bring renewed scrutiny to the handling of 1984 Anti-Sikh Riot cases...////...