Will submit to the majesty of law, says Navjot Singh Sidhu after SC's verdict
A panel of Justices AM Khanwilkar and S K Kaul granted the victim's family's review petition on the question of Sidhu's punishment. Earlier, the Supreme Court held Sidhu guilty of "voluntarily inflicting injury" to a 65-year-old man but spared him jail time by awarding merely a Rs 1,000 punishment.
FollowAfter the Supreme Court sentenced former Punjab Congress head Navjot Singh Sidhu to one year in prison in a 1988 road rage case, the cricketer-turned-politician stated in a tweet that he will bow to the majesty of the law.
A panel of Justices AM Khanwilkar and S K Kaul granted the victim's family's review petition on the question of Sidhu's punishment. The Supreme Court held Sidhu guilty of "voluntarily inflicting injury" to a 65-year-old man but spared him jail time by awarding merely a Rs 1,000 punishment.
Also Read |Â Navjot Singh Sidhu faces one-year rigorous imprisonment in 1988 road rage case
Gurnam Singh died of his injuries following a battle with Sidhu and his assistant Rupinder Singh Sandhu in 1988. "We have granted a review application on the matter of punishment." We impose a one-year jail term on the respondent. "The order in the issue will be uploaded later in the day," the Supreme Court added.
Reacting to theverdict, Congress politician Sukhjinder Singh Randhawa said no one can contest the Supreme Court's ruling. "No one can make up for the damage Sidhu has done to the Congress party. What Congress could not accomplish, the Supreme Court did today. In February, I requested Rahul Gandhi to dismiss Sidhu and Sunil Jakhar from the party," Randhawa stated.
Also Read |Â 1988 road rage case: Navjot Sidhu tells SC 'fine is adequate'
Â
Sidhu and his companion Rupinder Singh Sandhu were first charged with murder, but the trial court acquitted him in September 1999. However, the Punjab and Haryana High Court overturned the decision, finding them guilty of culpable homicide that did not amount to murder and sentenced him to three years in jail.Â
The prosecution's case was that in December 1988, the victim and the appellants got into a heated argument over an appellants' vehicle that was allegedly parked in the middle of the road. According to the prosecution, this exchange resulted in a physical assault on the victim, who was pronounced dead when he arrived at the hospital. The prosecution claimed that Sidhu fled the scene of the crime.
