The trial of farm labour contractor Gurpreet Singh now hinges on whose name is written on cheques presented to the ANZ bank in late 2019. Photo / NZME
The trial of farm labour contractor Gurpreet Singh now hinges on whose name is written on cheques presented to the ANZ bank in late 2019. Photo / NZME
The prosecution made more allegations of fabricated evidence and witness collusion before an Immigration Act trial, centred around illegal vineyard workers, was adjourned in the Hastings District Court on Friday.
The trial of farm labour contractor Gurpreet Singh now hinges on whose name is written on cheques presented to the ANZ bank in late 2019.
Singh and his company JJ 2016 Limited each face three charges under sections of the Immigration Act that deal with breaching visas or allowing people to work in New Zealand who are not entitled to do so.
The prosecution case is that he allowed Indonesian nationals to work in Hawke's Bay vineyards when they had no visas to do so. The defence case is that the workers were not employed by him but by a sub-contractor, Farm Contract Limited.
The trial was adjourned on Friday after hearing all witnesses so that records could be obtained from the bank to see who the cheques covering farm workers' wages were made out to.
Judge Russell Collins said that if the cheques were made out to Farm Contract, "the prosecution case is sunk".
The four Indonesian men at the centre of the trial had been working in kiwifruit orchards and vineyards in Hawke's Bay. Photo / NZME
On Thursday, lawyers for the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment (MBIE) suggested that Singh, generally known as Saabi, had fabricated invoices and sub-contractor agreements placed before the court in support of the defence case. Singh denied these allegations.
On Friday, Balbir Singh, the former owner of Farm Contract Limited, said that he and not Saabi had employed the four Indonesians in 2019.
But MBIE prosecutor Ian Murray questioned Balbir Singh about financial records, saying that someone had approved payment on an invoice four days before the invoice was written.
"That's a bit of a slip-up in the fabricated documents, isn't it?" Murray said.
"These documents on their face value say that someone approved an invoice that didn't even exist for payment."
Balbir Singh denied this was the case.
"We received this information first and then we issue (the) invoice. Then, then they can write this date, whenever they want," Balbir Singh said.
Murray also pointed out that different invoices were written on different forms, suggesting that some of them "were fabricated later and you didn't have the old book".
"What I'm going to suggest to you is that you're taking the fall for Saabi," Murray said.
Murray also suggested that there had been collusion between Gurpreet Singh and two former employees who also gave evidence for the defence, Sukhjinder Singh and Govinder Singh, when they met during the court lunch adjournment.
Judge Collins adjourned the case until March 3 so that the financial records could be obtained. Gurpreet Singh was remanded at large.
The court has heard that JJ 2016 Ltd employed up to 400 workers at peak season and turned over $8 million in the financial year 2019-2020.
