Sidhu conviction stayed by SC

FIT TO BE VOTED: The stay on conviction means Sidhu will be able to contest the Amritsar LS bypolls.

Featured Blog

Rohit Khilnani

Terror, Terror Everywhere

Featured Slideshows

New Delhi: In a landmark order, the Supreme Court on Tuesday stayed the conviction of former cricketer-turned-politician Navjot Singh Sidhu. It's for the first time in the last 57 years that the Apex Court has stayed a conviction order by a lower court.

The SC order came as a shot in the arm for both Sidhu and the BJP, who were waiting with bated breath to find out how the SC decides his fate. The top court order now paves the way for Sidhu to contest the Parliament bypolls in Amritsar, a seat he himself vacated after he was convicted by the Punjab and Haryana High Court on December 1.

"Main court ke har faisle ko bhagwan ka faisla manta hoon (I consider the court's judgement as God's judgement)," Sidhu said.

The central election committee of the BJP has to now clear Sidhu’s name for the Lok Sabha bypolls and in all likelihood, the former cricket star will be named the party candidate for the seat.

Hearing a petition filed by the former BJP MP, the Apex Court stayed his conviction and three-year jail term till further orders.

The SC order is not open to appeal and it will be in force till the Apex Court decides on his criminal appeal challenging the Punjab and Haryana High Court order holding him guilty on charges of culpable homicide. It may be some time before the court hears his appeal and decides whether the high court order was correct or not.

The Punjab and Haryana High Court had on December 1 convicted Sidhu in a road rage case dating back to 1988 and sentenced him to three years of imprisonment on December 6, 2006. The court had also slapped a fine of Rs 1 lakh on him.

The court judgement says that the police FIR is not clear as to who gave the blow to Gurnam Singh. It also points put that the medical report does not state what caused Gurnam Singh’s death and doesn’t make it clear as to whether it was a subdural haemarroage or heart attack.

The court also underlines the fact that Sidhu had set a high moral standard by resigning after his conviction by the Punjab and Haryana High Court. When the incident happened, Sidhu was not in public life. So it is not proper to co-relate Sidhu’s being in public life to the charges against him, the court ruled.

For the BJP, the SC order was a kind of moral victory as the party has been maintaining all along that if the HC conviction is not stayed, it might irreparably damage Sidhu's political career.

BJP Spokesperson, Prakash Javadekar, said: "Justice has been done. With his record clear now, he can do what he likes and what the party decides for him."

Sidhu's counsel had also argued in the top court that his case cannot be compared with any other petty criminals as he doesn't have any criminal past. It was also argued that Sidhu didn't cause hurt to the man intentionally.

Sidhu was happy with the outcome. "We are very happy with the SC decision. The party will now take a decision on his candidature. If Sidhu contests Amritsar bypolls, he will surely win. Not only Amritsar, the party can win elections in the whole of Punjab,” Sidhu's lawyer Satpal Jain says.

Things look very good for Navjot Singh Sidhu on paper. Sidhu was not someone who was known as an active politician, but this incident - coming when it did - has catapulted him into the big league. In fact, the stay on his conviction may change the face of the elections in Punjab.

Gurnam Singh’s advocates, however, said though Sidhu had taken a high moral ground earlier and resigned from his post in the Parliament, now his lawyers have done a U-turn to say that Sidhu was falsely implicated in the case and was never present on the site of the murder.

Gurnam Singh's son Ashok has moved a petition in the Supreme Court, seeking enhancement of punishment for the former cricketer in the case. The petitioner has claimed that Sidhu should be charged under Sec 302. The high court had held Sidhu guilty under Sec 304 of IPC (culpable homicide not amounting to murder).

Other reactions:

Some legal experts say the Supreme Court's stay on the conviction may now open a Pandora's box for criminals to appeal for stays on their convictions in order to fight elections. "If politicians like Raja Bhaiyya and Amarmani Tripathi were to seek stay orders on their sentences, what would happen?" they argue.

Experts say that the stay on Sidhu's conviction cannot be considered a boost to politicians with criminal backgrounds like Shahabuddin and Amar Mani Tripathi or criminals like Abu Salem who want to jump into the fray.

They are of the opinion that Sidhu is not a petty criminal and that there is a big difference in the nature of the charges between Sidhu and the likes of Abu Salem - which is probably why the Supreme Court gave him the leeway of a stay.