38.6c New Delhi, India, Monday, January 12, 2026
Top Stories Supreme Court
Political NEWS Legislative Corner Celebstreet International Videos
Subscribe Contact Us
close
Crime, Police And Law

Golfer Sujjan Singh Case: Chandigarh Police Opposes Anticipatory Bail As Wife Complained Of Domestic Violence And Cruelty

By LawStreet News Network      12 March, 2020 07:03 PM      0 Comments
Golfer Sujjan Singh Case Domestic Violence And Cruelty

The UT Police filed a reply in the local court, wherein they have opposed the anticipatory bail, for which international professional golfer Sujjan Singh filed a plea in a domestic violence case. 

The matter will come up for hearing on March 16, 2020.

On January 16, 2020 a complaint was filed by Sujjans wife, International Golfer Irina Brar and it was registered by the Police under Section 406 of Indian Penal Code 1860 (IPC), (criminal breach of trust) and Section 498-A of IPC (husband or relative of husband of a woman subjecting her to cruelty) 

The Local Court had issued a notice to Police in seeking their response on Sujjans anticipatory bail on March 05, 2020. Irina and Sujjan live in Chandigarh and they were married in 2010, the daughter was born in 2012. 

In her complaint against her husband, she mentioned ample dowry was given by her parents but torture was inflicted on her and daughter, and that she often threatened to commit suicide. 

Allegedly, she wasnt allowed to take back her belongings when she went back to her home as some of her cupboards were locked and keys were with her in-laws. 

The golfer was booked for his actions on January 16, 2020 and joined the investigation on March 03, 2020. An application was filed by Sujjan Singh in which he informed that the almirahs which were locked but extra keys were in possession of his wife. Sajjan Singh stated that they have a joint bank locker whose keys were with Irina as well and this information was informed to the court by Police. 

While opposing the bail application, the Police mentioned that A total of 25 household items and one gold item, which belonged to Irina were returned by Sujjan. However, the items are yet to identified by Irina and the recovery (of items) is pending, hence the bail not be approved.

There were twenty-five items which were returned to Irina and those included golf kits, a box of toys, clothes and other household material.

 

Author: Asif Iqbal 



Share this article:

User Avatar
About:


Leave a feedback about this
TRENDING NEWS


TOP STORIES

wrong-bail-orders-alone-without-evidence-of-corruption-cannot-justify-removal-of-judicial-officer-sc
Trending Judiciary
Wrong Bail Orders Alone, Without Evidence of Corruption, Cannot Justify Removal of Judicial Officer: SC [Read Judgment]

Supreme Court rules that wrong bail orders alone cannot justify removal of a judicial officer without proof of corruption, misconduct, or extraneous considerations.

06 January, 2026 07:43 PM
divorced-muslim-woman-can-seek-maintenance-under-crpc-even-after-receiving-amount-under-muslim-women-protection-act-kerala-hc
Trending Judiciary
Divorced Muslim Woman Can Seek Maintenance Under CrPC Even After Receiving Amount Under Muslim Women Protection Act: Kerala HC [Read Order]

Kerala High Court holds that a divorced Muslim woman can claim maintenance under Section 125 CrPC even after receiving amounts under the 1986 Act.

06 January, 2026 08:19 PM
delhi-hc-full-bench-settles-bsf-seniority-dispute-rule-of-continuous-regular-appointment-prevails
Trending Judiciary
Delhi HC Full Bench Settles BSF Seniority Dispute; Rule of ‘Continuous Regular Appointment’ Prevails [Read Judgment]

Delhi High Court Full Bench rules BSF seniority is based on date of continuous regular appointment, rejecting claims for antedated seniority due to delayed joining.

06 January, 2026 08:45 PM
borrowers-cannot-invoke-writ-jurisdiction-to-compel-banks-to-extend-one-time-settlement-benefits-kerala-hc
Trending Judiciary
Borrowers Cannot Invoke Writ Jurisdiction to Compel Banks to Extend One-Time Settlement Benefits: Kerala HC [Read Judgment]

Kerala High Court holds borrowers cannot invoke writ jurisdiction to compel banks to grant One-Time Settlement benefits, as OTS is not a legal right.

07 January, 2026 09:22 PM

ADVERTISEMENT


Join Group

Signup for Our Newsletter

Get Exclusive access to members only content by email