Ripudaman Singh Malik, Man Acquitted In Air India Bombings, Wants Government To Pay Trial Costs

Posted: 04/17/2012 5:05 pm Updated: 04/20/2012 10:44 am

VANCOUVER - A man acquitted in the Air India bombings has repaid the British Columbia government $6.3 million in legal costs and now he wants it back.

Ripudaman Singh Malik is arguing he should be granted an appeal of the judgment that required him to hand over the money the government paid to cover his 2003 and 2004 trial costs. A court hearing is scheduled on the matter next week.

Malik also sued the B.C. and federal governments for malicious prosecution and violation of his charter rights but has discontinued that application.

On Tuesday, a lawyer for the millionaire businessman told the B.C. Court of Appeal that the Appeal Court judge made errors in fact when deciding Malik must pay back the legal fees.

Malik and his co-accused Ajaib Singh Bagri were acquitted in 2005 of mass murder and conspiracy charges related to a pair of 1985 Air India bombings that killed 331 people, mostly Canadians from Vancouver and Toronto.

Court heard Tuesday that after repeatedly failing to file the necessary documents in his ongoing fight against repaying his legal fees, Malik paid $6.3 million, including interest, on Feb. 29 after selling a downtown Vancouver building he owed with his wife.

After wrangling at the time of the trial, the B.C. government agreed to pay Malik's legal fees, and Malik agreed to pay it back eventually, but he also argued he needed more than the government was prepared to provide.

Now, Malik argues he made the pay-back agreement under duress.

On Feb. 3, B.C. Court of Appeal Justice Daphne Smith said in a written decision that Malik's appeal of the ruling ordering him to pay back the government had been dismissed as abandoned.

She said Malik failed to show any bona fide attempt to pursue the appeal, to which there was no merit.

Smith also noted Malik’s “history of attempting to defraud the province and admitted contempt of court orders."

Malik's second appeal is based on that ruling, although B.C. Supreme Court Judge Sunni Stromberg-Stein, who turned him down for extra legal funding during the trial, said he was using his family to hide his assets.

In April 2011, the Supreme Court of Canada granted the B.C. government access to evidence that was seized in a bid to prove Malik can afford to pay his multimillion-dollar legal bill.

A bail hearing in 2000 heard Malik and his wife Raminder Malik had a net worth of $11.6 million, although he made a court application less than a year later, saying he had no money to fund his legal defence.

Inderjit Singh Reyat is the only person who's ever been convicted for his part in the Air India bombings.

In November 2010, he was found guilty of perjury at Malik and Bagri's trial and was handed a nine-year sentence, but he appealed that decision.

Malik's hearing next week will be before B.C. Supreme Court Judge Ian Josephson, who acquitted the pair in March 2005.

FOLLOW CANADA POLITICS

VANCOUVER - A man acquitted in the Air India bombings has repaid the British Columbia government $6.3 million in legal costs and now he wants it back.Ripudaman Singh Malik is arguing he should be gran...
VANCOUVER - A man acquitted in the Air India bombings has repaid the British Columbia government $6.3 million in legal costs and now he wants it back.Ripudaman Singh Malik is arguing he should be gran...
Filed by CP  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 73
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2  Next ›  Last »  (2 total)
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
FredSanders
I Have An F- Rating From The NRA
12:24 PM on 04/18/2012
$6.3 Million makes some very, very jealous I see.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Mr e MaN
Political Atheist
01:49 PM on 04/18/2012
Alleged terroist and mass murders being aquited makes many angry. Liars and decievers makes many angry
photo
BCSLAVE
Got a key?
10:06 AM on 04/18/2012
Never....he is disgusting. He claimed to be destitute to avoid paying anything in his mass murder trial. He wanted taxpayers to pay the bill instead all the while he lived in a 5 million dollar home he owned? The Judge dismissed his claim and called him disgusting.

His new move to steal tax money should be stopped full stop!
07:55 AM on 04/18/2012
I am disgusted by knowing that a man would ask for his money back even though he got away with such a grave crime. I am an Indian of the same religion as this man and it just hurts deep down knowing that this mans crimes will forever tarnish the image of the many Sikhs around the world and especially in Canada. Sikhs have been widely labeled as terrorists just for wearing turbans and this mans acts just reinforce these judgements. This man makes me sick and deserves to be in jail.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
PlayTOE
Morals evolved due to cooperative group living
05:35 AM on 04/18/2012
If he is innocent, why should he be out of pocket by 6.3 million?
04:01 AM on 04/18/2012
The government of BC paid for his legal fees in 2003 and 2004 ? why?
Was always with the impression if you were charged with a crime you paid for your defence, no government grants or loans.

Or does this case fall under some obsecure provision in our much talked about charter
06:51 AM on 04/18/2012
read the charter --find out for yourself ----and you wont have to whine about it
07:39 AM on 04/18/2012
Guess the statement made by a law professor was right when he stated that the majority of people taking advantage of some of the charters rights were those already in prison or those charged with a crime.

Gives one a very secure feeling about "our charter"
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Ansdlmol
11:58 PM on 04/17/2012
There is in Scottish law a verdict of not proven. This allows for the accused to be tried again for the same crime if more evidence comes to light. We need such a law here in Canada. As for his money let him Singh {sic} for it.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Russg
12:14 AM on 04/18/2012
The problem with such a law is it encourages sloppy trials that lead to the defendant being in court over and over again for the same charges. Our Charter is quite specific about preventing repeat trials. Once the due process of our court system is satisfied (one must admit that this in itself is rather time consuming and gives both sides plenty of time to gather evidence and argue their point), then the issue is dropped.

"(h) if finally acquitted of the offence, not to be tried for it again and, if finally found guilty and punished for the offence, not to be tried or punished for it again"
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Ansdlmol
02:27 AM on 04/18/2012
That has never been a problem in Scoland so are you inferring that Canadian police and prosecuting council work is shody? I can hardly imagine anything encouraging sloppy work and if it does then it bears out that the Canadian system is shoddy.
09:18 AM on 04/18/2012
On November 20, 1982 app. 7 months after our Charter came into effect a woman in Nova Scotia was found guilty of killing her abusive husband.

The crown was able to appeal the verdict on some grounds or another, but it was for the same crime- she was also found guilty and served some time in jail (I as well as a lot of people think she should have been given a medal)

She was also represented by public defence council and as far as I know it is the barristers association in that province that volunteers their services with little cost to the taxpayers.

If this man received money from the province to pay for a defence (I realize it was paid back) why?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
cinderelladressmaker
12:39 AM on 04/18/2012
I like the sound of that law! Bring it on!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
cinderelladressmaker
11:27 PM on 04/17/2012
In my opinion, $6.3 million is a pretty small price to pay for getting off by acquittal on such a heinous crime. The trial was a farce, the non convictions were outrageous! Mr. Malik, you lucky **********, just accept the court ruling and shut the **** up!
SamEasy
You really don`t want to know.
04:27 AM on 04/18/2012
Who financed this guy anyways? Kadaffi?????
This comment has been removed due to violations of our [Guidelines]
11:22 PM on 04/17/2012
The problem isn't with Malik and Bagri. They were taken to court and won their case. The problem isn't even with the court.
The police and the crown failed. Ultimately the state failed in it's duty to protect it's citizens and prosecute the criminals who committed the crime. They bungled the case from step one. The mismanaged over paid security industry couldn't produce evidence and the Queen failed to couldn't prosecute.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
FredSanders
I Have An F- Rating From The NRA
11:19 PM on 04/17/2012
ShamefulTabloidMisleadingHeadline.
HP, are you better than that?
Pulitzer Prize or PutzPrize?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Spartan Ideal
12:46 AM on 04/18/2012
The headline isn't misleading if you actually pay attention to the news.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
FredSanders
I Have An F- Rating From The NRA
11:18 PM on 04/17/2012
Trial was in 2005 and the headline is "ACQUITTED.....?", intending to mislead the reader that this happened just now?
Shameful tabloid ploy.
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Christian Cotroneo
11:33 PM on 04/17/2012
Easy Fred. I think most of us are aware the Air India trial wasn't today. Sorry if you got that impression. :)
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
cinderelladressmaker
01:07 AM on 04/18/2012
Within the headline it reads, 'man acquitted'. I did not find it misleading or deceiving?
As Christian mentioned, most of us are aware this trial is far from recent!
11:02 PM on 04/17/2012
still a whole bunch of dead people, IMO the guy is likely guilty but cant be proved beyond a reasonable doubt, or maybe even the jury intimidated..
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
FredSanders
I Have An F- Rating From The NRA
11:19 PM on 04/17/2012
Sorry, not guilty is not guilty, or do you completely distrust the justice system? Completely?
11:40 PM on 04/17/2012
$6 million buys a lot of lawyer, ever hear of OJ?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Mr e MaN
Political Atheist
11:52 PM on 04/17/2012
not guilty is not the same as innocent.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
tmzrules
10:51 PM on 04/17/2012
He's a Canadian Citizen, who paid a guy to get him off on the charges. It happens everyday.
The rich get away with stuff, the poor go to jail.
10:39 PM on 04/17/2012
Lying is acceptable in the Koran, if it is used for good. No wonder these people are skilled liars - just like the Shafira's. This is disgusting and sinister behavior without any hint of conscience.
11:07 PM on 04/17/2012
Don't get me wrong - I don't believe he should get a dime back. I don't even think he should have been acquitted. My reason for commenting is that, skilled liar or not, he's a Sikh, not a Muslim, so you wouldn't likely find him reading or abiding by the Koran.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
FredSanders
I Have An F- Rating From The NRA
11:20 PM on 04/17/2012
You seen one brown face, ya seen them all, to some.
11:27 PM on 04/17/2012
My apologies to all.
I cannot lie, I appreciate your clearing that up for me. Thank you Leroy!

I will just add this:
It is an added crime that people, who have no boundaries win. There are no rules in their game.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ljkcan
I don't let geographical borders limit my thinking
11:40 PM on 04/17/2012
He is a sikh saying he is reading the q'uran is the equivalent of serving pork chops to hasidic jews.

He did kill many innocent people but it was full on Indian hatred for another sect.
10:33 PM on 04/17/2012
Pay him off and send him back to wherever he came from.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
FredSanders
I Have An F- Rating From The NRA
11:21 PM on 04/17/2012
He came from here. He just does not look like you, but that is enough isn't it?
This comment has been removed.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
wendyweb47
Keeping an open mind
10:19 PM on 04/17/2012
This man is a killer, a crook and a fraud. He should NOT get this money back - I am not willing to pay for his defense.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
FredSanders
I Have An F- Rating From The NRA
11:22 PM on 04/17/2012
He is acquitted and is none of the above. But you.....