Sippy Sidhu murder: List Kalyani’s regular bail plea before some other Bench, directs Justice Chitkara of Punjab and Haryana HC

Tribune News Service

Saurabh Malik 

Chandigarh, August 1

Justice Anoop Chitkara of the Punjab and Haryana High Court today directed the placing of Kalyani Singh’s regular bail plea before some other Bench in the Sippy Sidhu murder case after the Central Bureau of Investigation and the complainant objected to his Court hearing the matter.

As the case came up for hearing this morning, Kalyani Singh’s counsel Sartaj Singh Narula placed before the Bench an affidavit by the petitioner’s father saying he had no objection to the case being heard by the Court.

“However, counsel for the respondent--CBI--on instructions from Navdeep Singh Brar, IPS, Superintendent of Police, CBI, as well as the counsel for the complainant, submit that they have objections if this Court hears the matter,” Justice Chitkara observed.

Before parting with the order, Justice Chitkara asserted that the matter be listed before some other Bench after obtaining appropriate order from the Chief Justice. Justice Chitkara, on the previous date of hearing, had directed the petitioner, the complainant and the CBI —through appropriate persons — to file “respective affidavits of objection/no objection regarding hearing of the matter by this Court”.

Among other things, Kalyani had contended that the CBI special Judge, who rejected her bail plea, failed to appreciate that the investigating agency had not been able to bring up, or point out at, any new evidence that would indict the petitioner “beyond whatever evidence that was available with them at the time of filing report under Section 173 CrPC on December 7, 2020”. It was evident from the remand application, and also the reply to the bail application, filed by the CBI before the Special judge.

In her petition filed through counsel Sartej Singh Narula and Arshdeep Singh Cheema, Kalyani Singh added the Court had conveniently ignored the fact that the petitioner had all these years never tried to influence the witnesses or tamper with the evidence. It was evident from the fact that “there has never been any complaint from any quarter, even from the family of the deceased.” 

It was added that the CBI had itself admitted on December 7, 2020, that the “investigation conducted till date revealed no direct evidence against Kalyani Singh”. It was also added that the prosecution was required to establish its case beyond the shadow of doubt in a criminal matter. “Sufficient evidence has not come on record yet for launching prosecution against Kalyani Singh,” it was further added.

About The Author

Tribune News Service

The Tribune News Service brings you the latest news, analysis and insights from the region, India and around the world. Follow the Tribune News Service for a wide-ranging coverage of events as they unfold, with perspective and clarity.

Join Whatsapp Channel of The Tribune for latest updates.