Pleading for dismissal of a petition filed by the family of the riots victim against the closure of case against Tytler, the investigating agency said that there is no evidence to prosecute the Congress leader in the case.
Additional Sessions Judge V K Khanna, after going through CBI's written submission, asked the victim's family to file its response and posted the matter for further hearing on August 21.
Lakhwinder Kaur, whose husband was killed in the riots, is seeking further investigation by the CBI into the case following claims about emergence of fresh evidence, saying the trial court had wrongly dismissed a petition protesting CBI's decision to give a clean chit to the senior Congress leader.
An additional metropolitan magistrate had on April 27 accepted the closure report filed by the CBI in the case against Tytler, saying there was no sufficient evidence to send him for trial.
"There is nothing which suggests that accused Tytler was seen on November eight, 1984, near Gurudwara Pulbangash or incited a mob for killing Sikh people," the magistrate had said.
The CBI had given a clean chit to Tytler for the second time in a row on April 2 last year claiming lack of sufficient evidence against him in the case pertaining to the murder of three persons on November one, 1984, following the assassination of the then Prime Minister Indira Gandhi.
The alleged role of Tytler in the case relating to the killing of three persons, including one Badal Singh in 1984, near Gurudwara Pulbangash in north Delhi was re-investigated by CBI after a court had in December 2007 refused to accept a closure report filed by the agency.
The court had allowed CBI's arguments that Tytler was present at Gandhi's residence at Teen Murti Bhavan and was not at the scene of crime, saying that its contentions were justified by material, including some visual tapes and versions of some independent witnesses.
Witness Jasbir (now residing in California), in an affidavit, had claimed before the Nanavati Commission that he had heard Tytler on November three, 1984, rebuking his men for the "nominal killings" carried out in the riots.
The court rejected Jasbir's version, saying he had deposed for something which took place on November three while the case related to an incident of November one, 1984.