STAFF REPORTER
GUWAHATI, Jan 17: The charge hearing in the death case of Assamese music icon Zubeen Garg has been postponed to January 30 after the accused informed the court that they had not yet received all the necessary documents required to proceed with the hearing, lawyers body representative Apurba Kumar Sharma said on Saturday.
Speaking to reporters, Sharma, who is also the General Secretary of the Gauhati Lawyers Association, said January 17 had earlier been fixed for the charge hearing in the case.
Related Posts:
However, on the same day, two separate petitions were filed by accused Siddharth Sharma and Shyamkanu Mahanta seeking permission to appear before the court through video conferencing.
The court disposed of both petitions while imposing specific conditions.
Sharma said the court made it clear that the accused would not be allowed to dispute their identity at any stage of the trial.
In addition, the court directed that defence counsels must remain physically present in court during the cross-examination of witnesses, even if video conferencing is permitted for the accused.
According to Sharma, two of the accused also submitted petitions stating that they were yet to receive all relevant documents required for the charge hearing.
Taking note of this submission, the court decided to defer the charge hearing and rescheduled it for January 30.
Meanwhile, bail applications were filed on January 17 by accused Shyamkanu Mahanta and Nandeswar Bora, who was reportedly serving as the bodyguard of Zubeen Garg.
The Special Public Prosecutor sought time to file objections to the bail pleas, following which the court fixed January 22 for hearing all five pending petitions related to the case.
Elaborating on the legal aspects related to developments in Singapore, Sharma explained the functioning of a coroner’s court.
He said coroner’s courts operate under special circumstances, particularly in cases involving unnatural or unexplained deaths.
Such courts primarily examine investigation reports submitted by the authorities and may accept them if no discrepancies are found.
However, Sharma added that if inconsistencies, gaps or lapses are detected, the coroner has the power to order a fresh or further investigation.
He also noted that family members of the deceased are legally permitted to participate in coroner proceedings.
While refraining from commenting on why a family member of the deceased may not have participated in the Singapore coroner’s proceedings, Sharma said the forum could have been significant in determining whether the death was purely accidental or involved other factors.
“The coroner’s court can be an important platform to establish the truth—whether the death occurred due to drowning or if there was any other angle involved,” he said. The case will next come up for hearing on January 22 with regard to the bail petitions, while the charge hearing has now been scheduled for January 30.
