Navjot Singh Sidhu jailed for a year in 1988 road rage case

On May 15, 2018, the apex court, in its judgement authored by Justice J Chelameswar (since retired), had spared Sidhu with just Rs 1,000 fine in the case

The Supreme Court on Thursday imposed one-year rigorous imprisonment on former Punjab Congress chief and cricketer Navjot Singh Sidhu in a 1988 road rage case, in which he was earlier let off with just a Rs 1,000 fine.

A bench of Justices A M Khanwilkar and Sanjay Kishan Kaul noted an error apparent on the face of the record in its 2018 judgement which needed remedial action.

The court noted it had missed out important material aspects that Sidhu was an international cricketer, tall and well built and aware of the force of a blow that even his hand would carry, when he hit the man, more than double his age.

Also Read | Despite jail term, Sidhu can contest polls: Legal expert

"The hand can also be a weapon by itself where say a boxer, a wrestler or a cricketer or an extremely physically fit person inflicts the same," it said.

"In the given circumstances, tempers may have been lost but then the consequences of the loss of temper must be borne," the bench added.

The top court emphasised maintaining a reasonable proportion between the seriousness of the crime and the punishment, saying "a disproportionately light punishment humiliates and frustrates a victim of crime".

"We do believe that the indulgence was not required to be shown by only imposing a fine and letting him go without any sentence," the bench said.

The court said when a 25-year-old man, an international cricketer, assaults a man more than twice his age and inflicts, even with his bare hands, a severe blow on his (victim’s) head, the unintended consequence of harm would still be properly attributable to him as it was reasonably foreseeable.

Even though any harm might not be directly intended, some aggravated culpability must be attached if the person suffers a grievous hurt or dies as a result, the court added.

The bench enhanced the sentence for Sidhu, acting on a review petition filed by the kin of the deceased, Gurnam Singh, against the 2018 judgement.

The bench said this court had been indulgent in ultimately holding Sidhu guilty of an offence of simple hurt under Section 323 of the IPC.

The top court, however, rejected the contention by the victim's counsel senior advocate Sidharth Luthra to convict Sidhu under more grave charges of culpable homicide not amounting to murder.

On May 15, 2018, the apex court, in its judgement authored by Justice J Chelameswar (since retired), had spared Sidhu with just a Rs 1,000 fine in the case.

The court had then convicted Sidhu of a milder offence of causing voluntarily hurt under Section 323 of the IPC.

The punishment for the offence carried a maximum jail term of up to one year, or a fine that may extend to one thousand rupees, or both.

The court had then looked into circumstances like the incident was of over 30-year-old, there was no past enmity between the accused and 65-year-old deceased, Gurnam Singh and no weapon was used by Sidhu, to arrive at its conclusion.

The court had then declined to consider a plea made on behalf of complainant Jaswinder Singh, who accompanied the deceased in the car on the fateful date on December 27, 1988, in Patiala, that the state went out of its way to shield the accused because of his celebrity status.