Shyamkanu Mahanta moves bail plea as charge hearing in Zubeen case deferred to January 30

The charge hearing in the Zubeen Garg death case has been deferred to January 30 after the accused informed the court that they had not received all relevant documents required for the proceedings, Gauhati Lawyers Association General Secretary Apurba Kumar Sharma said on January 17.

Speaking to the media, Sharma said January 17 was earlier fixed for the charge hearing. On the same day, two petitions seeking permission for video conferencing were filed by accused Siddharth Sharma and Shyamkanu Mahanta. 

The court disposed of both petitions with specific conditions, including that the accused would not dispute the identity of the accused persons during the trial and that defence advocates must remain physically present before the court during the cross-examination of witnesses.

Sharma said two of the accused submitted petitions stating that they were yet to receive all relevant documents necessary for the charge hearing, following which the court decided to defer the proceedings to January 30.

Meanwhile, bail petitions were filed on January 17 by Shyamkanu Mahanta and one Nandeswar Bora, who was reportedly the bodyguard of Zubeen Garg. 

The Special Public Prosecutor sought time to file objections to the bail pleas, and the court accordingly fixed January 22 for hearing all five pending petitions.

Also Read: Why only seven? Non-resident Assamese at yacht must face probe too: Garima Saikia Garg

Explaining the role of the Singapore coroner’s court, Sharma said such courts function under special circumstances, particularly in cases of death. He said the coroner’s court examines the investigation report submitted by the authorities and may accept it if no discrepancies are found. However, if lapses or inconsistencies are detected, the coroner has the authority to order a reinvestigation.

He further noted that family members of the deceased are permitted to participate in coroner proceedings. 

Sharma said he could not comment on why the deceased’s family member did not participate in the Singapore proceedings but added that the coroner’s court could have been an important platform to establish whether the death was accidental or involved any other angle.

“The coroner court was also a good platform to unearth the truth—whether the death was due to drowning or involved any other cause,” Sharma said.

The case will next be heard on January 22 for the bail pleas, while the charge hearing is scheduled for January 30.