LUDHIANA – Within 10 minutes of Bagha Purana Court took the decision to send Jagtar Singh Johal alias Jaggi to judicial custody, he was was returned to court to face new allegations over the death of a Christian priest in 2015 and been handed to Ludhiana Police custody for 2 days.
He has not been charged with any crime and his lawyer claims his client has been tortured by police.
Indian police have accused Mr Johal of financing the purchase of weapons used to kill Hindu leaders, but his lawyer said he is now accused of involvement in the death of a priest in Ludhiana in July 2015.
Mr Johal was taken from a street in the Indian state on 4 November.
His family say he was there on holiday having married in the region in October.
Appearing earlier on Friday, Mr Johal was presented at a lower court in Bagha Purana, Moga.
He entered the court room flanked by half a dozen Punjabi officers.
Prosecutors did not ask for Mr Johal’s police custody to be extended.
During the brief hearing, he was transferred from police to judicial custody after the judge questioned the prosecution about claims the accused was tortured.
A British High Commission official was also in court and met with the accused.
The court also allowed Mr Johal’s mother-in-law and father-in-law to meet him briefly.
Concerns of torture
Campaigners have called for the immediate intervention of the British Foreign Office in the case.
On Thursday about 400 British Sikhs demonstrated outside the Foreign Office in London demanding more be done to help him.
The Sikh Federation said it feared Mr Johal was being targeted over his work highlighting the Sikh genocide in 1984.
A Foreign Office spokesman said: “Our consular staff in New Delhi have visited a British man who has been detained in Punjab. We have met his family to update them, and have confirmed that he now has access to his lawyer.”
On allegations of torture, the spokesman added: “We take all allegations or concerns of torture and mistreatment very seriously and will follow up with action as appropriate.
“When considering how to act, we will avoid any action that might put the individual in question or any other person that may be affected at risk.”