Stating
that
he
wanted
to
"organise
his
medical
affairs",
Congress
leader
Navjot
Singh
Sidhu
on
Friday
approached
the
Supreme
Court
seeking
a
few
weeks'
time
to
surrender
and
undergo
the
one-year
rigorous
imprisonment
imposed
on
him
in
a
1988
road
rage
case.
The
apex
court
had
on
Thursday
imposed
a
sentence
of
one-year
rigorous
imprisonment
on
Sidhu
in
the
case,
saying
any
"undue
sympathy" to
impose
an
inadequate
sentence
would
do
more
harm
to
the
justice
system
and
undermine
the
public
confidence
in
the
efficacy
of
law.
Senior
advocate
A
M
Singhvi,
appearing
for
Sidhu,
mentioned
the
matter
before
a
bench
headed
by
Justice
A
M
Khanwilkar
and
said,
"He
will,
of
course,
surrender
shortly."
"We
want
a
few
weeks
to
surrender.
It
is
after
34
years.
He
wants
to
organise
his
medical
affairs,"
Singhvi
added.
The
bench,
also
comprising
Justice
J
B
Pardiwala,
told
Singhvi
that
the
judgment
in
the
matter
was
passed
by
a
special
bench.
"You
can
file
that
application
and
mention
it
before
the
Chief
Justice.
If
the
Chief
Justice
constitutes
that
bench
today,
we
will
consider
that.
If
that
bench
is
not
available,
it
will
have
to
be
constituted.
A
special
bench
was
constituted
for
that
matter,"
the
bench
observed.
The
top
court
said
a
formal
application
has
to
be
placed
before
the
appropriate
bench.
Singhvi
said
he
will
try
and
mention
the
matter
before
the
Chief
Justice.
Though
the
apex
court
had
in
May
2018
held
Sidhu
guilty
of
the
offence
of
"voluntarily
causing
hurt"
to
a
65-year-old
man,
it
spared
him
a
jail
term
and
imposed
a
fine
of
Rs
1,000.
In
its
judgment
delivered
on
Thursday,
the
top
court
had
observed
that
in
the
given
circumstances,
tempers
may
have
been
lost
but
then
the
consequences
of
the
loss
of
temper
must
be
borne.
The
apex
court,
while
allowing
the
review
plea
filed
by
the
complainant
over
the
sentence,
had
said
it
is
a
case
where
some
"germane
facts
for
sentencing"
appear
to
have
been
lost
sight
of
while
imposing
only
a
fine
on
Sidhu.
Noting
that
the
"hand
can
also
be
a
weapon
by
itself"
where
a
boxer,
wrestler,
cricketer,
or
an
extremely
physically
fit
person
inflicts
a
blow,
the
bench
had
said
it
did
believe
that
indulgence
was
not
required
to
be
shown
at
the
stage
of
sentence
by
only
imposing
fine
and
letting
Sidhu
go
without
any
imposition
of
sentence.
"The
result
of
the
aforesaid
is
that
the
review
applications/petitions
are
allowed
to
the
aforesaid
extent
and
in
addition
to
the
fine
imposed
we
consider
it
appropriate
to
impose
a
sentence
of
imprisonment
for
a
period
of
one-year
rigorous
imprisonment
to
be
undergone
by
respondent
no.1
(Sidhu),"
the
apex
court
had
said.
It
had
noted
in
the
judgment
that
the
top
court,
to
some
extent,
had
been
indulgent
in
ultimately
holding
him
guilty
of
the
offence
of
simple
hurt
under
section
323
of
the
Indian
Penal
Code
(IPC)
and
the
question
is
whether
even
on
sentence,
the
mere
passage
of
time
can
result
in
a
fine
of
Rs
1,000
being
an
adequate
sentence
where
a
person
has
lost
his
life
by
reason
of
the
severity
of
blow
inflicted
by
Sidhu,
who
was
25-year-old
at
that
time,
with
his
hands.
Section
323
(punishment
for
voluntarily
causing
hurt)
of
the
IPC
entails
a
maximum
jail
term
of
up
to
one
year
or
with
a
fine
which
may
extend
to
Rs
1,000
or
both.
In
September
2018,
the
apex
court
had
agreed
to
examine
the
review
petition
filed
by
the
family
members
of
the
deceased
and
had
issued
the
notice,
restricted
to
the
quantum
of
sentence.
The
apex
court
had
on
May
15,
2018,
set
aside
the
Punjab
and
Haryana
High
Court
order
convicting
Sidhu
of
culpable
homicide
and
awarding
him
a
three-year
jail
term
in
the
case,
but
had
held
him
guilty
of
causing
hurt
to
a
senior
citizen.
The
top
court
had
also
absolved
Sidhu's
aide
Rupinder
Singh
Sandhu
of
all
charges
saying
there
was
no
trustworthy
evidence
regarding
his
presence
along
with
Sidhu
at
the
time
of
the
offence
in
December
1988.
The
May
2018
verdict
had
come
on
the
appeal
filed
by
Sidhu
and
Sandhu
challenging
the
high
court's
2006
judgement
convicting
them.
According
to
the
prosecution,
Sidhu
and
Sandhu
were
in
a
Gypsy
parked
in
the
middle
of
a
road
near
the
Sheranwala
Gate
Crossing
in
Patiala
on
December
27,
1988,
when
the
victim
and
two
others
were
on
their
way
to
the
bank
to
withdraw
money.
When
they
reached
the
crossing,
it
was
alleged,
that
Gurnam
Singh,
driving
a
Maruti
car,
found
the
Gypsy
in
the
middle
of
the
road
and
asked
the
occupants,
Sidhu
and
Sandhu,
to
remove
it.
This
led
to
heated
exchanges.
Sidhu
was
acquitted
of
murder
charges
by
the
trial
court
in
September
1999.
However,
the
high
court
reversed
the
verdict
and
held
Sidhu
and
Sandhu
guilty
under
section
304
(II)
(culpable
homicide
not
amounting
to
murder)
of
the
IPC
in
December
2006.
It
had
sentenced
them
to
three
years
in
jail
and
imposed
a
fine
of
Rs
1
lakh
each
on
them.