Add Tribune As Your Trusted Source
TrendingVideosIndia
Opinions | CommentEditorialsThe MiddleLetters to the EditorReflections
UPSC | Exam ScheduleExam Mentor
State | Himachal PradeshPunjabJammu & KashmirHaryanaChhattisgarhMadhya PradeshRajasthanUttarakhandUttar Pradesh
City | ChandigarhAmritsarJalandharLudhianaDelhiPatialaBathindaShaharnama
World | ChinaUnited StatesPakistan
Diaspora
Features | The Tribune ScienceTime CapsuleSpectrumIn-DepthTravelFood
Business | My Money
News Columns | Straight DriveCanada CallingLondon LetterKashmir AngleJammu JournalInside the CapitalHimachal CallingHill ViewBenchmark
Don't Miss
Advertisement

SC defers hearing in Navjot Sidhu case to March 25

Unlock Exclusive Insights with The Tribune Premium

Take your experience further with Premium access. Thought-provoking Opinions, Expert Analysis, In-depth Insights and other Member Only Benefits
Yearly Premium ₹999 ₹349/Year
Yearly Premium $49 $24.99/Year
Advertisement

New Delhi, March 21

Advertisement

The Supreme Court on Monday deferred to March 25 hearing on a petition seeking to enhance the punishment given to Punjab Congress leader Navjot Singh Sidhu in a 33-year-old road rage case in which he was let off with Rs 1,000 fine.

Advertisement

A Bench led by Justice A M Khanwilkar said the Special Bench — in which Justice SK Kaul is there — would hear the matter on Friday.

The top court had on February 25 asked Sidhu to respond to a plea to enlarge the scope of the petition seeking review of its verdict. The petitioner said Sidhu’s conviction should not have been for the lesser offence of voluntarily causing hurt.

Responding to the court’s notice, Sidhu said: “It is respectfully submitted that the contents of the present applications reiterate only overruled arguments and do not show any extraordinary material, calling for interference on all aspects from this court.”

Advertisement

Terming it a “malicious bid for reopening of a well-reasoned judgment”, he urged the court to dismiss the review petition on account of “unaccounted delay without any cogent explanation” that raised doubts on his bona fides. —

Advertisement
Show comments
Advertisement