Sippy Sidhu murder case: CBI to move Supreme Court
National-level shooter and corporate lawyer Sukhmanpreet Singh Sidhu, alias Sippy Sidhu, was shot dead at a Sector 27 park in Chandigarh on the night of September 20, 2015, eight years ago.
The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) has decided to move the Supreme Court against Punjab and Haryana high court’s order asking the agency to provide the complete set of documents to Kalyani Singh, the prime accused in the 2015 Sippy Sidhu murder case.

National-level shooter and corporate lawyer Sukhmanpreet Singh Sidhu, alias Sippy Sidhu, was shot dead at a Sector 27 park in Chandigarh on the night of September 20, 2015, eight years ago.
Sippy was the grandson of a former Punjab and Haryana High Court judge, justice SS Sidhu.
Kalyani was arrested by CBI on June 22, 2022. A charge sheet naming her as the main accused has been filed by the agency. She is the daughter of justice Sabina (retd), who also remained acting chief justice of the Himachal Pradesh high court.
In May, the Punjab and Haryana high court had allowed Kalyani’s plea, in which she was seeking access to copies of documents filed by the prosecution, electronic data and articles not relied upon by CBI in the challan.
Besides, this she was also seeking documents relied upon by CBI earlier in the “untraced report” filed in 2020.
On August 7, a CBI court directed the investigating agency to ensure “strict compliance” of the high court’s orders on providing Kalyani the complete set of documents. The order came in the wake of high court, on July 31, rejecting CBI’s plea for extension of time to comply with the May 8 order.
Now, CBI has informed the trial court that the competent authority has approved to challenge the May 8 order before the Supreme Court and a recommendation from the senior law officer of the government has also been obtained.
As per CBI, high court is also being approached again for extension of time, as if the May 8 order is complied with, filing of appeal before Supreme Court would become infructuous and seriously prejudice CBI’s case.