Man appeals prison sentence in failed religious murder plot

A man imprisoned for his role in an unsuccessful plot to murder a Kiwi Indian radio broadcaster has failed in an effort to have his sentence reduced.

A judgement recently released by the Court of Appeal states Sarvjeet Sidhu pleaded guilty to the attempted murder of Auckland man Harnek Singh, a prominent talk show host and YouTuber, one week before Sidhu was to go on trial.

Singh’s “polarising” views on politics and the Sikh religion were strongly opposed by Sidhu and other members of a Sikh temple in East Tāmaki.

In November, 2023, in the Auckland High Court, Justice Mark Woolford sentenced Sidhu to nine and a half years in prison for his role in the crime.

Sidhu appealed his sentence on multiple grounds including the starting point was too high and the judge didn’t take into account all available personal discounts.

The Court of Appeal judgement states Sidhu attended the Sikh temple in East Tāmaki with his co-offenders, one of whom, Gurinderpal Brar, was the temple’s founder and spiritual leader.

Brar had significant influence over the members of the temple, including Sidhu and his co-offenders.

“Some members believed orders from Mr Brar to be akin to orders from God.

“Mr Brar was angry with Harnek Singh’s commentary on politics and the Sikh religion.

“He sought assistance from members of his inner circle at the temple to kill Harnek Singh.”

Brar procured weapons, including knives, and stolen vehicle registration plates for the attack on the radio broadcaster.

On December 23, 2020, Brar gave the weapons and plates to Sidhu and one of his co-offenders, Jaspal Singh.

Brar told them to do the job properly and they had been chosen by God.

At about 6.50pm the same day, Sidhu and two of his co-offenders parked outside Harnek Singh’s temple in a black Ford Ranger utility vehicle, which had been fitted with the stolen registration plates, and waited for him to finish work.

He left the temple shortly after 10pm. Sidhu and his two co-offenders followed him in the Ford Ranger.

They were then joined by another co-offender in a Toyota van and two other co-offenders in a Toyota Prius.

Harnek Singh didn’t notice the three vehicles following him and continued driving to his home.

Just before he could pull into his driveway, the Toyota van was used to ram his vehicle off the road.

He came to a stop with the Ford Ranger on one side and the Toyota van on the other.

“Mr Sidhu and his two co-offenders got out of the Ford Ranger and began their attack on Harnek Singh,” the Court of Appeal judgement states.

“They smashed the driver window and attacked him through it, using knives to slash and stab him.

“They inflicted approximately 40 wounds to his arms, chest, neck and head over a period of less than five minutes.

“During the attack, Harnek Singh used his vehicle’s horn to alert his neighbours who called the police.

“The police arrived and administered first aid, including a tourniquet to his arm, which saved his life.”

Following the attack, Sidhu and Jaspal Singh drove to another co-offender’s home in Flat Bush.

Sidhu tried to conceal the Ford Ranger inside a garage, showered, and disposed of his bloodied clothing, and tended to his injuries.

The injuries Harnek Singh suffered were extensive.

He received multiple lacerations to the face, scalp, neck and chest, which had to be initially stapled and later surgically repaired.

Three people, including Sidhu, pleaded guilty to the attempted murder, and three more were found guilty following a jury trial.

In sentencing Sidhu, Justice Woolford said his offending was on a par with that of his co-offender Jaspal Singh, who’d been sentenced to five years and three months’ imprisonment after taking a starting point of 12 and a half years.

Sidhu’s appeal of his sentence was advanced on the grounds the starting point was manifestly excessive; the judge erred in omitting to impose discounts for factors including youth, previous good character and remorse, among others; and the judge didn’t place sufficient weight on the “causative contribution between the offending and Mr Sidhu’s religious devotion”, and that a further discount should be allowed.

Sidhu also sought to adduce fresh evidence as part of his appeal relating to a psychological report prepared on him by a registered psychologist.

However, the Court of Appeal justices said they weren’t persuaded the starting point was too high.

Due to the “many aggravating features of the offending, including that the victim nearly died, a starting point near the maximum sentence available was justified”.

“In summary, we’re satisfied the 12-and-a-half-year starting point was appropriate, taking into account the various aggravating features of the offending and the fact Mr Sidhu’s role was comparable with that of Jaspal Singh.”

They were unsatisfied Sidhu can point to circumstances which warrant a good character discount and they were satisfied Justice Woolford was correct to decline a discount for remorse.

The Court of Appeal found Justice Woolford was entitled to decline a youth discount.

It also declined to afford a discount for Sidhu’s parental responsibilities.

His application to adduce further evidence was declined and his appeal against his sentence was dismissed on all grounds.