The complainant said that if it was a case of roadrage then he would hit and run, but Sidhu first removed him from the auto and punched the victim and also took the vehicle keys with him. The state government, having taken a stand in the HC seeking Sidhu's conviction, found it hard to change its stand in the SC.
A trial court had acquitted Sidhu, saying that the man had died following a heart attack.
As leader of Opposition, Sukhpal Singh Khaira has termed the Punjab government's recommendation against Sidhu as targetting of the minister by his own government, SAD alleged Khaira and his Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) were acting as a B team of the Congress.
The high court sentenced them to three-year imprisonment and imposed a fine of Rs 1 lakh each on the convicts.
What Next for Intel Corporation (INTC) Stock After Today's Big Increase?
It dropped, as 60 investors sold Intel Corporation shares while 703 reduced holdings. 601 grew stakes while 177 funds took stakes. A company that manages their assets well will have a high return, while if manages their assets poorly will have a low return.
Unlike the state of Uttar Pradesh where the Chief Minister was being accused of shielding a rape accused MLA (Kuldeep Singh Sengar in Unnao rape case), the leader said, "Chief Minister Amarinder Singh has always maintained that his government would uphold the law and will not interfere in judicial matters".
The victim's family has appealed to SC that the earlier sentence of 3 years, given by Punjab and Haryana High Court, should be enhanced. "Accused A1 (Navjot Singh Sidhu) had given fist blow to deceased Gurnam Singh leading to his death through brain hemorrhage". But, Punjab and Haryana High Court convicted him for culpable homicide not amounting to murder. Saron reportedly told the court that the trial court's findings that the victim died of cardiac arrest were wrong.
As per the prosecution case, Sidhu and Sandhu were allegedly present in a Gypsy parked near Sheranwala Gate Crossing on December 27, 1988, when Gurnam Singh, Jaswinder Singh and one other were going to the bank to withdraw money for a marriage function. The trial court verdict was rightly set aside by the High Court.
The Supreme Court is now hearing final arguments in the 30-year-old case.