38.6c New Delhi, India, Friday, April 26, 2024
Judiciary

Review Petition against the reduction of Navjot Singh Siddhu’s Sentence Adjourned

By LawStreet News Network      22 March, 2022 06:15 PM      0 Comments
Review Petition against Navjot Singh Siddhu

On 21st March’2022, the Supreme Court adjourned the review petition which was filed against its order of reduction of sentence of Navjot Singh Sidhu to Rs.1000 from 3 years imprisonment in a 1987 road accident case. Before the bench of Justice AM Khanwilkar and SK Kaul the review petition were listed. 

On 25th February 2022, Navjot Singh Sidhu was asked by the Supreme Court to file a reply on the miscellaneous applications seeking punishment for him for the committal of murder. The applications held that Sidhu had committed Murder whereas he was being charged under Section 323 of Indian Penal Code 1860, i.e. for causing hurt. 

The Senior Advocate Siddharth Luthra who appeared for the petitioner had submitted to the Supreme Court an application which sought the enlargement of the scope of notice. 

Therefore, he referred to the Supreme Court’s judgement in Brij Pal Singh Meena to submit that a person who causes death should not be punished in the category of hurt. He argued that there was error apparent on the face of record in the judgement against which review had been sought. The 15th May 2018 verdict was taken as reference.

The Senior Advocate P Chidambaram who represented Sidhu objected the application seeking the enlargement of the scope. He submitted that, upon the analysis of the evidence it was concluded that this is not the case where the deceased’s death was caused by Sidhu.

The Senior Advocate P Chidambaram sought time to file an affidavit in this regard. He said, "It would not bring justice if the entire matter is heard again. We just got the application yesterday. Whether the judgment in Brij pal Singh Meena will apply in this case & whether 323 is correct or not? That's what your lordship wants me to address on. I will address."

A time of two weeks was granted by the Bench to Navjot Singh Sindhu to file a response to the application and also directed for the listing the matter after two weeks.

Navjot Singh Sidhu said that he had "an impeccable political and sporting career in the last three decades". Navjot Singh Sidhu through an affidavit urged the Supreme Court to not punish him more in a 33 years old road rage case.

The Affidavit states, “More than three decades have passed since the date of the incident. This Hon'ble Court in numerous cases considered fine as an adequate punishment if there has been a long passage of time from the date of offense. It is also relevant to point out that the answering respondent has had an impeccable political and sporting career in the last three decades. The respondent faced trial between 1994 and 1999 and abided by all the directions of the Trial Court and was eventually acquitted.”

It was also expressed in the affidavit that Sindhu while having undergone a sentence of 1 day has always abided by the directions of the Court below and the Apex Court.

Background of the Case

The Supreme Court Bench consisting of Justice J Chelameshwar and Justice Kishan Kaul on 15th May 2018 had acquitted Sidhu from the charge under Section 304 i.e. Culpable Homicide not amounting to Murder in the road rage case which happened in 1998. 

An appeal filed by Sidhu against a December 2006 Punjab and Haryana High Court verdict conviction and sentencing him to 3 years in jail in a road rage case for which the acquittal was granted. The Bench found Sidhu guilty under Section. 323 (voluntarily causing hurt) of the Indian Penal Code 1860, and also sentenced him with a fine of rupees 1000 only. Rupinder Singh Sandhu, his co-accused was acquitted of all the charges.

Case title: Jaswinder Singh(dead) Through Legal representative Vs Navjot Singh Sidhu and Others



Share this article:

User Avatar
About:


Leave a feedback about this
TRENDING NEWS

supreme-court-orders-man-to-pay-rs-25-lakh-for-misappropriating-wifes-jewellery-on-wedding-night
Trending Judiciary
Supreme Court Orders Man to Pay Rs 25 Lakh for Misappropriating Wife's Jewellery on Wedding Night [Read Judgment]

Supreme Court orders man to pay Rs 25 lakh for taking wife's jewelry in 2003, emphasizing her right to stridhan as absolute property.

25 April, 2024 03:31 PM
sc-announces-integration-of-whatsapp-with-it-services
Trending Judiciary
SC announces integration of WhatsApp with IT services

Supreme Court integrates WhatsApp with its IT services to enhance access to justice and judicial transparency, simplifying case updates and information sharing.

25 April, 2024 03:56 PM

TOP STORIES

sc-orders-medical-examination-of-yr-old-rape-survivor-seeking-to-terminate-her-week-pregnancy
Trending Judiciary
SC orders medical examination of 14-yr-old rape survivor seeking to terminate her 28-week pregnancy

Supreme Court orders medical examination of 14-year-old rape survivor seeking termination of 28-week pregnancy. Decision to be made after evaluating impact on her health.

20 April, 2024 11:00 AM
a-critique-of-the-supreme-courts-adventurism-for-lgbtqia-rights
Trending Legal Insiders
Overreaching Jurisdiction: A critique of the Supreme Court's adventurism for LGBTQIA rights

In its over-enthusiasm to protect LGBTQIA+ rights, has the Supreme Court exceeded its constitutional mandate under Article 142? A Delhi University research scholar evaluates the theme.

22 April, 2024 10:48 AM
new-criminal-laws-watershed-moment-for-society-cji
Trending Legal Insiders
New criminal laws watershed moment for society: CJI [Read Inaugural Remarks]

CJI Chandrachud hails new criminal laws as a watershed moment, marking a significant overhaul for the justice system, emphasizing adaptation and technology's role.

22 April, 2024 11:26 AM
sc-grants-permission-for-medical-termination-of-pregnancy-of-14-yr-old-rape-survivor
Trending Judiciary
SC grants permission for medical termination of pregnancy of 14-yr-old rape survivor

Supreme Court grants medical termination of pregnancy to 14-yr-old rape survivor after assessing adverse health impacts, setting aside Bombay HC's decision.

22 April, 2024 12:14 PM

ADVERTISEMENT


Join Group

Signup for Our Newsletter

Get Exclusive access to members only content by email