Khushi Bajpai
Published on: 28th July 2022 at 16:17 IST
Punjab and Haryana High Court fixes date on August 1 to hear Kalyani Singh’s regular bail request in the murder of Sippy Sidhu. On more than 30 counts, the accused here Kalyani Singh had filed petitions in the High Court for redressal.
Justice Anoop Chitkara took up the case and ordered the petitioner, complainant, and CBI to submit “respective affidavits of objection/no objection about hearing of the matter by this Court” through the proper channels.
Kalyani has argued, among other things, that the CBI special Judge who denied her bail request did not recognise that the investigating body had not been able to present or draw attention to any fresh evidence that would have indicted the petitioner “beyond whatever evidence that was available with them at the time of filing report under Section 173 CrPC on December 7, 2020.” The CBI’s remand motion and reply to the bail application, both submitted before the Special judge, made it clear.
Kalyani Singh stated that the court had simply overlooked the fact that the petitioner had never attempted to sway the witnesses or tamper with the evidence during the course of these years in her plea, which was submitted through Advocates Sartej Singh Narula and Arshdeep Singh Cheema. It was clear from the fact that “nobody, not even the deceased person’s relatives, has ever complained.” The CBI itself had acknowledged on December 7, 2020, that “no direct evidence against Kalyani Singh has been uncovered by the investigation conducted to now.”
Additionally, it was stated that in a criminal case, the prosecution had to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt. It was further said that “sufficient evidence has not yet been recorded for starting prosecution against Kalyani Singh.”
According to the appeal, the “most significant” feature of the case was that the CBI lacked any proof that “the petitioner and the deceased had ever spoken about meeting in Sector 27, Chandigarh, on September 20, 2015.”