|
The Supreme Court on Thursday adjourned the hearing on the review petition in the road rage case against Congress leader Navjot Singh Sidhu till February 25.
A special bench of Justices AM Khanwilkar and Sanjay Kishan Kaul adjourned the matter for February 25. Justice AM Khanwilkar said that there is a letter for adjournment. Senior Advocate P Chidambaram, appearing for accused Sidhu, sought adjournment on the matter saying that his client had circulated the letter for a new Advocate on Record be appointed. Senior Advocate Siddharth Luthra was appearing for the petitioners. The family of the 1988 road rage case victim had filed a review petition before the Supreme Court seeking a modification of its earlier order in which the Punjab MLA Navjot Singh Sidhu was acquitted. Sidhu was acquitted in connection with the culpable homicide charges but was convicted of the offence of voluntarily causing hurt in an order given by the apex court. The court had slapped a fine of Rs 1,000 on Sidhu. The court had also acquitted Sidhu's associate, Rupinder Singh Sandhu, in the case. The case has gone through Session Court, High court and Supreme Court. The Sessions Court Judge of Patiala had on September 22, 1999, acquitted Sidhu and his associate, due to lack of evidence in the case and giving the benefit of the doubt. It was then challenged by the victim's families before the Punjab and Haryana High Court, which had in 2006, convicted and sentenced Sidhu to three years imprisonment. Sidhu then filed an appeal before the apex court challenging this order. On December 27, 1988, Sidhu allegedly had beaten Gurnam Singh on his head, leading to his death. Sidhu counsel, in the letter seeking adjournment, also stated that the matters were unexpectedly listed in the Supplementary List on February 3 which was only published late in the evening of February 2. Sidhu counsel A. Karthik, who has written communication to Registry, stated in the letter that the senior counsel who had previously represented the Respondent in the Criminal Appeal, has expressed his inability to appear. The Respondent Sidhu is presently travelling and is trying to avail the services of another Senior Counsel to effectively represent him before this Court and a copy of the Review Petition is not available with him, the lawyer said. (ANI)
|
