SC sentences Sidhu to one year rigorous imprisonment in fatal road rage case

Special Bench reviews apex court’s 2018 judgment which let Punjab Cong. leader off with a fine of ₹1,000

Updated - May 19, 2022 04:38 pm IST

Published - May 19, 2022 02:45 pm IST - New Delhi

Congress leader Navjot Singh Sidhu addresses a press conference in Amritsar. File

Congress leader Navjot Singh Sidhu addresses a press conference in Amritsar. File | Photo Credit: PTI

The Supreme Court on Thursday awarded one year’s rigorous imprisonment to Punjab Congress leader Navjot Singh Sidhu in a 34-year-old fatal road rage case.

A Special Bench of Justices A.M. Khanwilkar and Sanjay Kishan Kaul reviewed the apex court’s May 2018 judgment, which had let off Mr. Sidhu with a fine of ₹1,000 saying such roadside brawls were a “very common sight in this country”.

The decision came in a review petition filed by the family of the victim, Gurnam Singh, who died in the road rage incident in 1988.

The Punjab and Haryana High Court had found Mr. Sidhu guilty of committing culpable homicide not amounting to murder. In appeal, the apex court, four years ago, had set aside the High Court verdict. The top court had held him guilty of the lesser offence of causing voluntary hurt.

Justice Kaul, reading out the judgment, said the court felt, on the basis of the facts placed before it, that it would have to review the judgment in terms of sentence.

The Review Bench held that it would serve the ends of justice to sentence Mr. Sidhu to a period of one-year rigorous imprisonment in addition to the earlier award of a fine of ₹1,000.

The case had returned to haunt Mr. Sidhu after over three decades, especially when the family of the victim upped the ante by filing an application contending that the facts of the case show he was responsible for causing more than hurt but was actually liable for far more grievous offences like culpable homicide or even murder.

Mr. Singh’s family had filed for a review of the judgment in 2018 itself. The court had issued a formal notice to Mr. Sidhu, represented by senior advocate A.M. Singhvi and advocate Karthik Ashok, specifically on the quantum of sentence, in September 2018.

During the hearing of the case, the court had observed that if the facts ultimately show a different offence, the punishment would also change.

Senior advocate Siddarth Luthra, for Mr. Singh’s family, had said the apex court’s own judgment proved, “the fact of the injury caused to the victim, the fact that the injury was caused ante-mortem, and the fact that it was caused intentionally by the respondent [Mr. Sidhu]“.

Mr. Luthra had argued that “when there is death of a human being, it may either be culpable homicide (amounting or not amounting to murder)... Offences affecting life are distinct from the offence of hurt. If hurt results in death, intended or unintended, the offence would fall within the category of an offence affecting life”.

Countering, Mr. Singhvi and advocate A. Karthik had said the family’s application, on top of filing for a review petition against the May 2018 judgment, was a “review of a review”. Entertaining the application would give rise to a dangerous precedent.

The senior lawyer had argued that the prosecution could not prove any personal enmity or motive behind the death. It was even “highly doubtful” whether the injury had eventually caused the death. Besides, Mr. Sidhu had never violated any conditions of bail and there was no lack of cooperation on his part at any time during the entire journey of 34 years of the case.

0 / 0
Sign in to unlock member-only benefits!
  • Access 10 free stories every month
  • Save stories to read later
  • Access to comment on every story
  • Sign-up/manage your newsletter subscriptions with a single click
  • Get notified by email for early access to discounts & offers on our products
Sign in


Comments have to be in English, and in full sentences. They cannot be abusive or personal. Please abide by our community guidelines for posting your comments.

We have migrated to a new commenting platform. If you are already a registered user of The Hindu and logged in, you may continue to engage with our articles. If you do not have an account please register and login to post comments. Users can access their older comments by logging into their accounts on Vuukle.