The Allahabad High Court has refused to quash criminal proceedings in a batch of cases filed against residents of Kanpur in connection with the 1984 anti-Sikh riots, holding that the “passage of time and the absence of original records cannot defeat the course of justice in crimes of such magnitude”.

During a hearing on Tuesday (March 24, 2026), a Bench of Justice Anish Kumar Gupta dismissed petitions filed by nine individuals, seeking the quashing of charge sheets and summoning orders in cases dating back to 1984. The court emphasised that a prima facie case existed against the accused based on material gathered during re-investigation by a Special Investigation Team (SIT).

The High Court observed that the nature of the incidents was “akin to a genocide against a particular community”, in which several innocent persons were killed or set ablaze, and houses and properties were burnt, destroyed, and looted, in the aftermath of former Prime Minister Indira Gandhi’s assassination.

Although First Information Reports (FIRs) were lodged at the time, most cases were closed soon after, with final reports exonerating the accused, the Court noted.

These cases were revived decades later following the Justice G.T. Nanavati Commission’s findings. Acting on the Supreme Court’s directions, an SIT was constituted to re-investigate cases where records could be reconstructed. In Uttar Pradesh, 186 cases were identified, including 20 in Kanpur, of which 11 led to fresh charge sheets.

In their petitions, the accused argued that a fair trial was no longer possible, as original FIRs, post-mortem reports, and other key documents had either been destroyed or were unavailable. They also contended that witness statements recorded nearly four decades after the incident were unreliable and that continuing proceedings would violate their right to a fair trial under Article 21 of the Constitution.

Additional Advocate General Manish Goyal, appearing for the State of Uttar Pradesh, opposed the petitions, arguing that the Supreme Court had ordered re-investigation with “full awareness of the limitations posed by missing records”. 

He maintained that eyewitness testimonies and other material collected by the SIT established the involvement of the accused and justified prosecution.

Relying on Supreme Court precedents, the High Court reiterated that once a prima facie case is made out, its inherent powers to quash proceedings must be exercised sparingly. 

“Questions regarding the reliability of evidence, including delayed testimonies or claims of alibi, are matters to be tested during trial,” the Bench observed.

The High Court also took note of the Supreme Court directions calling for expeditious adjudication of these long-pending cases, given the difficulties in securing witnesses over time.

Concluding that sufficient material existed to proceed, the High Court dismissed all the petitions, paving the way for trial in the cases.