B.C.’s director of civil forfeiture has filed a claim to seize a Honda Civic that is suspected to have been involved in a January extortion-related shooting in Surrey.
The notice of claim was filed in B.C. Supreme Court in Vancouver on June 19 against the owner of the 2004 Honda Civic, Damanveer Singh.
On Jan. 20, Surrey Police responded to a call of a shooting in the 7200-block of King George Boulevard around 4:30 a.m. Police found that a business and several vehicles had been damaged by gunfire. As the business was unoccupied at the time of the shooting, there were no reported injuries, police said in a news release at the time.
The shooting was believed to be extortion-related. As of July 2, no one has been arrested or charged, Surrey Police said.
The claim alleges that CCTV footage from the business showed the Honda Civic approach the business with the passenger window open.
The passenger was wearing a red face covering, and “several muzzle flashes” were visible in footage from the car’s passenger-side window. The claim does not state who was in the car at the time of the shooting.
On Jan. 26, the Surrey Police Service pulled over a car matching the Honda Civic’s description. Damanveer was a passenger, and his brother, Taranvir Singh, was driving when they were pulled over.
Police compared photos of the Civic taken during the stop with the CCTV footage of the shooting and found it was the vehicle involved in the Jan. 20 shooting.
On Feb. 25, police stopped the Civic in the 9600 block of 129 Street and seized it. The claim states that Singh was the driver at the time but does not specify whether it was the vehicle’s owner or his brother who was driving.
The director of civil forfeiture is seeking to seize the vehicle because it is suspected of being “an instrument of unlawful activity,” according to the claim. “The vehicle has been used to engage in unlawful activities which could have resulted in, or were likely to result in…caused, or could have resulted in serious bodily harm.”
These unlawful activities are mischief, reckless discharge of a firearm at a building and at vehicles, unauthorized possession of a firearm in a vehicle, use of a firearm in the commission of an offence, and criminal negligence.
The claim alleges that Singh either “intended” to use the Civic to “engage in unlawful activity,” or he knew and “implicitly or explicitly” knew the vehicle would be used for the shooting. The claim offers another alternative that Singh also might have been “willfully blind” to his vehicle being used in a shooting.
The claim alleges that if the Civic is returned to Singh, or proceeds from the sale of it, would likely be used for another “unlawful activity.”
Singh, or his lawyer, must file a response to the claim within 21 days of being served.