Navjot Singh Sidhu Gets One Year Jail In 1988 Road Rage Case ML-News

Former Punjab Congress chief and former cricketer Navjot Singh Sidhu was on Thursday sentenced to one year imprisonment by the Supreme Court in the 1988 road rage case. In 2018, the Supreme Court left Sidhu with a fine of just Rs 1000. A bench of Justices AM Khanwilkar and Sanjay Kishan Kaul observed that there is an error in the 2018 judgment, which needs to be rectified. The top court said that it had missed out on an important aspect that Sidhu was an international cricketer who had a good fighting saddle.

He was well aware of the power of a blow. Not only this, he had attacked a person twice his age. The bench has said in its order, the hand of a boxer, wrestler, cricketer or fit person can also be a weapon. You may have lost your temper in the circumstances that have arisen, but still one will have to face the consequences of anger. Emphasizing on maintaining a fair ratio between the gravity of the offense and the punishment, the apex court observed that a disproportionately mild punishment humiliates and depresses the victim of the crime.

The top court said that even if no damage is done directly, but if the person is grievously hurt or resulting in death, then his guilt is increased. However, the top court rejected the contention of senior advocate Siddharth Luthra of the aggrieved party that Sidhu should be convicted under culpable homicide not amounting to murder. The top court found Sidhu guilty of section 323 (causing grievous hurt) only and sentenced him to a maximum of one year’s imprisonment for the offense.

Sanskrit verses in court order

The Supreme Court, while sentencing Navjot Sidhu in the case of road rage, also mentioned the shloka of culture in its 24-page order. which is like this-

Yatvayo yathkaalam yath pranam cha brahmin.

Prayashchitam Pradatvyam Brahmanairdha Pathakai.

Yen shuddhimvaproti na cha pranarvijute.

Aarti wa mahati yati na chachaitad vratmahadishe.

This means- Ancient scriptures have also been saying that the sinner should be punished according to his age, time and physical capacity. The punishment should not be such that he dies, but the punishment should be to rectify him and purify his thinking. Punishment that endangers the life of the sinner or the offender is not justified.