The Crown alleged the killing was a targeted, premeditated attack fuelled by personal resentment and rejection.
The defence, however, claimed the Crown’s evidence was entirely circumstantial.
Crown prosecutor Richard Smith told the jury the attack was deliberate and not a burglary or theft gone wrong.
He described a violent struggle that began inside Singh’s home and moved through the lounge and sunroom before continuing on to an outdoor decking area.
Smith said Singh had returned from a pizza party with friends shortly before the confrontation and was attacked in a calculated and persistent manner.
He told the jury that Rajinder had previously been rejected by a woman whom Singh later married, and had also had a marriage proposal to Singh’s sister turned down.
Police evidence, Smith said, showed Rajinder purchased gloves and a knife before the killing and sustained injuries inconsistent with his explanations.
Blood from both Rajinder and Singh was found in Rajinder’s vehicle, supporting the Crown’s theory of his movements after the attack.
Defence counsel Anne Stevens KC told the jury the Crown’s case was entirely circumstantial.
She noted there was no confession, no witness to the murder, and no proven motive.
Stevens argued the knife and gloves could have innocent explanations and said alternative possibilities existed, including that someone else committed the murder.
She suggested the Crown had pieced together multiple threads of evidence to form a narrative that did not necessarily prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
Rajinder was remanded in custody until sentencing.
Ben Tomsett is a multimedia journalist based in Dunedin. He joined the Herald in 2023.
