Father, son jailed for 85 years over beating neighbour to death in land dispute

May 08, 2019 News

---

By Feona Morrison

A 54-year-old man and his son were sentenced to a combined 85 years in jail for the killing of Mahaica, East Coast Demerara accountant, Suresh Nandkishore, who they beat to death during a fight over a disputed plot

of land. The sentences were handed down yesterday by Justice Navindra Singh at the High Court in Georgetown.Over two weeks ago, a 12-member jury found Sukhdeo Dharamdat and his son Eshwardat Dharamdat, 25, guilty of murder and manslaughter respectively, in relation to the unlawful killing of Nandkishore. However, lawyers for the convicts requested that probation reports be compiled on them.
Following the tendering of the probation reports into evidence, Justice Singh sentenced the older Dharamdat to 65 years’ imprisonment; his son was handed a 20-year jail term from which his time spent on remand was ordered to be deducted by the prison.
According to reports, Suresh Nandkishore, his father Bhopaul Nandkishore, and brother Parmanand Nandkishore, were in the process of erecting a fence on a plot of land on February 03, 2015, when a heated argument erupted between them and the Dharamdats. This led to a fight.

It was reported that the older Dharamdat, with whom the Nandkishores had a land dispute, came as they were working and appeared to have no objection. But Sukhdeo Dharamdat reportedly returned with his two sons, one of whom was armed with a cutlass.
The men reportedly picked up two of the posts that were meant for the fence and began lashing the Nandkishores about their bodies. Suresh reportedly tried to walk away, but was cornered and dealt several lashes to his head, blows that cracked open his skull. He was rushed to the hospital where he succumbed.
According to the probation report, persons in Mahaica described Sukhdeo Dharamdat as a “downright bully” who is known for fighting people for their lands. The man’s relatives echoed similar sentiments, Justice Singh said.
During his address to the court, Sukhdeo Dharamdat expressed no remorse. In fact, he maintained that the land, which the Nandkishores won rights to via a court order, belongs to him. The convict detailed how he had been occupying the land for more than 50 years, and that it was the Nandkishores who started the fight.
The elderly man went on to tell the court that the land had belonged to his grandmother, and about how many times he visited the Neighbourhood Democratic Council in relation to the land. Justice Singh repeatedly asked the convict to address the court on the verdict of the jury, and any other thing that would influence the court to give him a light sentence.
But Sukhdeo Dharamdat was bent on telling the court all about the land. At this point, Justice Singh stopped him and told him that he is still under the impression that the land belongs to him, despite the court ruling. “You have shown no remorse. You have confirmed the verdict of the jury,” the Judge told him in a stern voice.
Justice Singh pointed to an aspect of the probation report in which it was highlighted that Sukhdeo Dharamdat was involved in several disputes with villagers over lands in the community. In one of the disputes, it was noted that he burned his neighbour’s garden; while in another, he beat the neighbour until the neighbour’s hand was broken.
Added to that, Justice Singh highlighted the fact that Suresh Nandkishore’s brother, Parmanand, sustained injuries from the attack, while their father has been permanently disabled. Both father and son expressed that they were dissatisfied with the verdict of the jury. However, the son showed some remorse and apologised for what had happened. Eshwardat Dharamdat said, “I am not satisfied with the decision. But I am very sorry.”
Justice Singh had this to say to the young man, “Your father (Sukhdeo) put you in a lot of stupidness here, because he feels he own land. Bad influence to your life. Keep on doing the right thing; I think you could be a good person.”
In arriving at a sentence for Sukhdeo Dharamdat, Justice Singh commenced at a base of 60 years to which he added 10 years for “exceptional cruelty”. This brought the sentence to 70 years, but from that, the judge deducted five years for the time he spent on remand—making the final sentence 65 years.
In relation to Eshwardat Dharamdat, the Judge commenced at a base of 30 years, from which he deducted five years for expression of remorse and another five years for the favourable probation report—making his sentence 20 years.
The two men were represented by Attorneys Pamela De Santos, Brandon De Santos and Alana Lall. Abigail Gibbs, Tuanna Hardy and Teriq Mohamed presented the case for the prosecution.

 

 

---

---