After spending more than five years in and out of the Canadian justice system, the man at the centre of an alleged immigration fraud scheme in Saskatchewan has had his case permanently stayed.

A permanent stay of proceedings is usually granted when a serious breach of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms has occurred – or if it’s determined that the accused cannot receive a fair trial.

Gurpreet Singh was found guilty in connection to an immigration fraud scheme that allegedly operated in the province nearly a decade ago.

However, due to the length of the proceedings and accusations of witness tampering and intimidation against the Crown, Singh was granted a stay in proceedings.

“He was literally trapped in this whole system,” explained Bhavin Jaggi, a member of Singh’s defence counsel. “I thank this court system and the legal system of this country for a fair decision.”

The string of events that officially ended with a decision from Regina’s Court of Kings’ Bench on July 23, actually began in 2016.

The Canadian Border Services Agency (CBSA) alleged that from June 2016 to November 2018, Singh was involved in exploiting work permits afforded to temporary foreign workers.

The CBSA alleged that Singh impersonated registered charities by falsifying job offer letters and selling them for a profit to those seeking to gain entry or remain in the country.

The investigation began after a fake job offer letter was presented at a port of authority.

Following the verdict, Singh’s defence counsel applied for a mistrial – citing evidence that the Crown was intimidating witnesses for the purposes of incriminating Singh.

“This all started when one witness approached Mr. Jaggi to say, ‘I had an interview which was not disclosed to the defence … where I was pushed to implicate Gurpreet,’” defence counsel Tavengwa Runyow recalled. “We did our own investigation, and it came to light that there [was] probably more than one witness who had endured this.”

However, the court ruled that there was no conclusive evidence of intimidation on behalf of the Crown.

“Even though the court did not find an affirmative case of intimidation, we believe that the stay of proceedings remedy was perfect in this case,” Runyow explained.

Singh originally hails from India. Due to his legal issues, he’s been unable to see his family since leaving for Canada approximately 15 years ago.

Through a translator, Singh said that he’s happy that the case has finally concluded and that for the past 10 years, he had been fighting for his freedom in court.

The case was marred by the complications of the COVID-19 pandemic – which caused many delays. Both Jaggi and Runyow characterized the stay of proceedings as a win for the justice system as a whole – and a rebuke against the apparent overreach by the Crown and the CBSA.

“Government and state institutions have got awesome power, and it’s very difficult to fight in the criminal justice system, where not only does the government have more power, but the people accused of crime are sometimes deemed to be guilty simply because they’ve been accused of it,” Runyow said. “This could be your loved one, your brother, your sister, your friend, your cousin. This isn’t just something that happens to bad people.”

“The government has got a duty to be fair,” Runyow added.

“Not to be perfect, but to be fair and in that regard, they failed to do so.”