Zubeen case: Sarma avoids comment on Singapore court hearing

Assam chief minister Himanta Biswa Sarma on Thursday declined to comment on the ongoing hearing in a Singapore court regarding the death of singer-composer Zubeen Garg, even as the artist’s wife publicly urged authorities to ensure a full accounting of the circumstances surrounding his death.

Sarma, however, has earlier described the incident as a murder that merited exhaustive inquiry, a position that heightened expectations of political pressure on investigative outcomes.

In a carefully worded response to reporters, Sarma said he was aware of media coverage of the Singapore coroner’s court proceedings but would not comment, piously adding, “Politicians should not get in matters related to court. We should stay away.” He distinguished the Singapore Police investigation from India’s own legal process, saying, “It is as per their process. Our process is different.”

Zubeen Garg (52), a cultural icon in Assam and beyond, died on 19 September 2025 in Singapore, where he had travelled to attend the North East India Festival. Singapore Police told the coroner’s court on Wednesday that Garg was “severely intoxicated” and drowned off Lazarus Island after refusing a life jacket, and that there was no indication of foul play. That finding has been a point of contention for the family.

In India, the case has been handled by a Special Investigation Team (SIT) of the Assam Police’s CID, which has so far arrested seven people. In a charge-sheet filed last month, four of those accused have been charged with murder, and another with culpable homicide not amounting to murder. Two others are accused of criminal conspiracy and criminal breach of trust.

Those Indian charges align with the position Sarma has publicly taken in recent months — that the circumstances of Garg’s death could not be dismissed as accidental and needed thorough legal scrutiny. That stance put pressure on investigators and was interpreted by many in Assam as a signal that the state government would pursue the case robustly, despite jurisdictional complexities.

On Thursday, Garg’s wife Garima Saikia Garg used social media to reaffirm the family’s commitment to uncovering the truth. She appealed for both the Indian and state governments to monitor the Singapore proceedings closely and take “all necessary diplomatic and legal steps” to ensure that every relevant fact emerges before the court.

While Singapore authorities initiated the hearing on their own motion, she noted that the Indian High Commission in Singapore has been actively involved in coordinating legal and medical processes, including the post-mortem.

According to Garima, the family was prompted to pursue formal legal action after videos of the yacht where Garg last was surfaced online, giving rise to serious questions about the circumstances of his death. She said the family has fully cooperated with Singapore Police and provided information and statements as required, but did not disclose details in real time out of respect for investigative integrity.

In a detailed statement presented to the Singapore Coroner’s Court through state prosecutors, Garg’s relatives raised specific queries including the planning of the outing on 19 September, Garg’s physical state at the time, the safety measures in place on the yacht, how quickly distress was recognised and medical help provided, and whether the conclusion of “no foul play” was justified.

Garima stressed that these are questions that “arise automatically” when a life ends under unclear circumstances, and they represent “a family’s right and duty.” She appealed for a swift and rigorous prosecution in India based on the existing charge-sheet, insisting that jurisdictional issues should not cause delay or dilution in the pursuit of justice.

“We continue to seek only one thing,” she wrote — that “every relevant fact is fully and transparently examined” and that the guilty are punished “to the highest level,” adding that the family will pursue every legal avenue “solemnly, consistently, and in good faith.”

With PTI inputs