On 28th November, three Khalistani extremists have been found guilty of attempting to kill popular radio personality Harnek Singh, who is living in Auckland. The victim is a Sikh who is originally from India. The 27-year-old Sarvjeet Sidhu accepted a guilty plea to attempted murder only days before the trial commenced, while 44-year-old Sukhpreet Singh was pronounced culpable of accessory. Another 48-year-old Khalistan supporter, who lives in Auckland was also sentenced for the crime.
On 23rd December 2020 after a late-night broadcast radio personality Harnek Singh, commonly known as Nekki was ambushed by a mob of Sikh radicals in the driveway of his Wattle Downs residence resulting in more than 40 stab wounds. Three automobiles full of men were pursuing him when he was wounded “within an inch of his life”.
Judge Mark Woolford noted that although the 48-year-old defendant, who is subjected to interim name suppression, was not present at the time of the attack, he had been harbouring a long-standing grudge against the international radio host for his political views and more liberal interpretation of their shared Sikh faith. According to the judge, he organised the “hit” and recruited goons to carry out his orders using his magnetic pull over others. He proclaimed that in this instance, both community protection and a potent deterrent message were required.
Two courtrooms were packed with the perpetrator’s supporters as a sentence of thirteen and a half years was handed down. The individual must serve a minimum of nine years before he is eligible to ask for parole. A 14-year sentence is the maximum for attempted murder. The judge stated that he was granted a six-month credit for the time he spent on electronically monitored bail throughout his protracted trial in September and October which is the only reason he did not receive the maximum punishment.
The attack’s motivation, according to the Judge “bears all the hallmarks of religious fanaticism.” He observed, “Violence of this kind is committed in what is perceived as the furtherance of the greater good. Sentencing in this context requires a different approach. The emphasis must be placed on protecting the community from further violence and it is essential to send a strong message of deterrence to others.”
Hundreds of thousands of people listen to Harnek Singh’s online radio show and most of them are from outside New Zealand. Harnek Singh said on the witness stand that he had attracted a sizable number of ardent detractors but he clarified that while most of them were more fundamentalist or conservative in their views, his personal views on Sikhism are probably more on the liberal end of the spectrum.
Harnek Singh wrote a victim impact statement, which the prosecutors delivered aloud during the court as he was not present there. He stated that the incident necessitated multiple operations as well as more than 350 stitches to his head and upper torso. Three years later, he is still healing from the physical injuries, but psychological wounds continue to affect him and his family.
“My family faces fear each day when the sun goes down. My wife and child wonder if someone is lurking in the shadows, looking into our home, wanting to attack us again. We went from a carefree, spontaneous and fun-loving family to one that is constantly in fear for my safety”, Harnek Singh said. However, he mentioned that he hopes his family won’t live in dread and expressed gratitude to the New Zealand legal system for ensuring that “no one is above the law, not even religion.”
Harnek addressed the culprits and highlighted, “You came to kill me. You tried to silence me. You wanted to send a chilling message to all those who express their disagreement with your unorthodox religious views. But you failed. I will continue to express my opinions and beliefs as I always have. The only chilling message you have managed to send is to people with the same views and opinions as yours that actions have consequences and that in a country like New Zealand, the law does not bend for you if your wrongful acts are in the name of God.”
The judge found resonance in those comments and he repeated them when he sentenced the accused. Dale Dufty, the defence attorney had asked for concessions because of his client’s troubled past and difficult childhood in India. Luke Radich, the crown prosecutor, countered that the latter’s involvement and the case’s character mandated the maximum 14-year beginning point.
“If this is not amongst the most serious cases of its type, then what is,” Radich asked and added, “It could not have been more pre-meditated and (the defendant) was the architect of it.” The judge eventually agreed. Defence attorney Katie Hogan claimed that there was no proof the primary offender was aware of the attack in advance.
Defence counsel Andrew Speed alleged that Sarvjeet Sidhu, who was one of the knife assailants in the driveway, was brainwashed by the principal offender. He received a nine-and-a-half-year prison sentence. Sukhpreet Singh, who helped the two stabbers unsuccessfully conceal their vehicle and gave them a shower and new clothes after the attack, was given a six-month home detention sentence.
