Bar&Bench News Network
Even worse than the 40 tonnes of poisonous gas that descended onto Bhopal and the 25,000 deaths it caused, is the judgement that was passed earlier today, 26 years hence. Chief Judicial Magistrate Mohan P. Tiwari at Bhopal convicted 8 individuals and sentenced them to imprisonment of 2 years and released them on bail later the same afternoon. Bar& Bench had earlier covered in detail as to why the Courts are not a friend of Bhopal.
The convicted include Mahindra Chairman and former Union Carbide Chairman, Keshub Mahindra, current Chairman and then Managing Director of Union Carbide, Vijay Gokhale, then Vice President, Kishore Kamdar, Works Manager, J. Mukund, Assistant Works Manager Late R.B. Roy Chowdhury, Production Manager S.P. Choudhury, Plant Superintendent K.V. Shetty and Production Assistant, Shakeel Qureshi.
Reports indicate that the convicted were charged for causing death by doing a rash or a negligible act, not amounting to culpable homicide under Section 304-A of the Indian Penal Code. They have also been imposed the maximum sentence under the provision of 2 years and a fine of Rs. 1.17 lakh ($2,485) and an additional fine of Rs. 5 lakh ($10,618) on the company. However, Judge Tiwari granted them bail almost immediately after sentencing them.
Civil society, however, is unhappy. They claim that the methyl isocyanate (MIC) continues to have its effects on Bhopal. Both local and international activists claim that the gas cloud that enveloped Bhopal on the midnight of December 3, 1984 has found its way into the soil and water, apart from being passed along genetically. Further, they claim that the charges were diluted and the accused ought to have been tried under more stringent provisions of the Indian Penal Code.
Raghu Rai, a photographer, who worked for environmental organization Greenpeace in 1984, had captured the horror the following day. His pictures on the tragedy continue to define the disaster. He told NDTV, “It is corruption and tragedy all the way, the lesser said about it, the better.”
Union Carbide’s Warren Anderson, who is absconding on the files of the court, continues residing in the Hamptons in New York. Meanwhile, a non-bailable warrant issued in 1989 remains pending against Anderson, who fled India earlier in 1984 after posting bail of Rs. 25,000 ($ 531, according to today’s exchange rate).
BJP is already in the process of gaining mileage out of the fiasco. They are using the effects of the disaster and the delayed judgment to leverage their agenda to block the Nuclear Liability Bill. Our Special Correspondent had written on how Union Carbide never quite recovered from the Bhopal leak.
|
- 1. "is foreign direct investment more important then life ". Alankar, Jamshedpur
- 2. "I cant believe this. SC took 6 months to clear a family dispute but took more than 25 years to give justice to Bhopal gas victims. Wake up India.". Ambani, Delhi
- 3. "Slightly tasteless beginning. Nothing, least of all a foolish judgment, could possibly be worse than the "40 tonnes of poisonous gas that descended onto Bhopal and the 25,000 deaths it caused"". Guest, Bangalore
- 4. "These are some moments when we feel ashamed to be known as largest democratic country's citizens . This kind of "Industrial Terrorism " happened & look at the verdict .Even a 3rd rate pick pocket will face tougher punishment .what do we need to call ou...rself - Block heads !!!Keep ur tears in stock , more to come Shed till you die .Quite disturbing that ,no one came out with Candle lights & so on .". Manorenjan, Tellicherry
- 5. "I am a law graduate, i had studied this case in my law books as one of the very negligent and inhumane act against humanity and environment. I was awaiting for a strict punishment for such a homicide. This comes as a shock to me..... Just cant believe the judicial set up anymore.". Shilpa, Bangalore
- 6. "Bhopal Verdict is the fantastic example which proves that our judicial system is completely failed. It has taken our courts of law more than 25 years to deliver justice, which has no importance. Unfortunately, people like Anderson and those who assited him at that time to fly from India will always be couted as SMART people. Eeveryone is corrupt right from peon to commissioner. Whom we should look upon for help ? Guest Mumbai. ". Guest, Mumbai
- 7. " Bhopal Gas Leak & Slaughter Of HumanityAbout the recently decided SC judgement on the culprits of the Bhopal Gas Leak the vox populi is terribly adverse. The victims are in thaw though the press has thundered about the mode of appreciating the complicity of the eight implicated, one of whom has given up the ghost in the mean time. Beyond doubt, there is much hue and cry on this issue. The hue and cry is so much so that it calls names albeit condemns the overt reason employed by the Apex Court that has overturned the inherent definition of ‘culpability’. The outcome of the long drawn legal tug of war between the victims and the accused as per the current anguish is that their Lordships have converted the charge of ‘culpable homicide not amounting to murder’ under Section 304 Part II of IPC to causing ‘death by negligence’ under Section 304(A) of IPC for a sentence of life imprisonment with fine into a sentence of two years imprisonment with fine.As per the sensitive intelligentsia with a view to decry or distract the victims from their innate right to fight against the offender, the Union Govt. in the wake of the said Tragedy had passed the Bhopal Gas Disaster (“Claims and Processing) Act in March 1985. The resenters from amongst the public justify their interpreting the enactment worth their attribution of evil intention of the Govt. The interpretation is thus a concerted attempt of denial of the rightful justice to the victims of the Tragedy since the Government of India(GOI) was appointed as the sole representative of the victims. The people whose cause of claims the representative Govt. had to negotiate with the Union Carbide Corporation(UCC) as respects settling their compensations were allegedly not consulted. The public discontent contains some elements to rely upon, on their side from the course of action the then Government of India preferred. It referred the matter of controversy to the USA being sharply opposed by the victims and vanguards of law alike. It exhausted immense wealth on the expense of its case there and in return gained in its favour the authority of dealing with the matter at abandon. New Yorker Judge Lord Keenan sent the case back to India making the UCC bound to the Indian judiciary for whatsoever act or offence of commission and omission on the soil of India having been indisposed to impose action as per US canons there for. After the decks were cleared as to who shall deliver the goods, the CBI could be able to submit the Charge Sheet under Section 304 Part II prescribed for an offence of ‘culpable homicide not amounting to murder’ in the year 1987 in the Bhopal Court of local jurisdiction amidst the efflux of priceless time and effete trial of fate in the Court of the US. The pronouncement made by the SC at that moment, quashed all the criminal cases against the Carbide Corporate while keeping in tact all the cases against the private agencies from amongst the people who have been striving against an alien offender, i.e. the Union Carbide since the fateful day the tragedy befell on them till date. As a fruit there of, the amount of recompense that was awarded to the Bhopal Gas victims in toto was Rs. 715 crores that severely affected the prospective interest of the posterities and in stead forfeited their right to sue the Union Carbide to strike a deal of settlement. To study the conviction of the accused under Section 304A IPC for the offence of ‘causing death by negligence’ the sentence prescribed is an incarceration term of two years and a fine of Rs. 1 lakh. The other Sections under which the accused are convicted are 336, 337 and 338 IPC for the offences of endangering safety, causing hurt and causing grievous hurt with sentences of three months, six months and two years imprisonment terms and fines amounting to Rs. 250/-, Rs. 500/- and Rs. 1,000 respectively. The travesty of truth and justice is that where as the Union Carbide of India Ltd(UCIL) has been fined with Rs. 5 lakhs under the same Sections of IPC the principal accused, i.e. the Union Carbide Corporation(UCC) CEO Warren Anderson together with the Union Carbide(Eastern), Hongkong have gone scot free treated as absconders. Abscondance as we very well know how is an easy escapade from the long arm of legal liability.To get a glimpse of the introductory para of the SC Judgement of the year 1989 we find, “The Bhopal Gas Leak tragedy that occurred at midnight on December 2, 1984, by the escape of deadly chemical fumes from the appellant’s pesticide factory was a horrendous industrial mass disaster, unparalleled in its magnitude and devastation and remains a ghastly moment to the dehumanizing influence of inherently dangerous technologies. The tragedy took an immediate toll of 2660 innocent human lives and left tens of thousands of innocent citizens of Bhopal physically impaired or affected in various degrees. What added grim ponderance to the tragedy was that the industrial enterprise was using Methyl Isocynate, a lethal toxic poison, whose potentiality for destruction of life and biotic communities was, apparently, matched only by the lack of a pre-package of relief procedures for management of any accident based on adequate scientific knowledge as to the ameliorative medical procedures for immediate neutralization of its effects.-Per Pathak, CJ and other Judges constituting the said Bench.Even though the other former Chief Justice Ahmadi fends off their reducing the charges against the UCC and voices that there is no scope in the law for 'vicarious liability'reading into the provisions of the Articles 14 (equality before law) & 21 (protection of life and personal liberty) of the Constitution enables us to arrive at the contrary conclusion. ". Pradeepta Mishra, HC Of Orissa, Cuttack
- 8. "it took 25 years to give judgement , but it didnt took a day to free the victims, its all about money ". Divya Narayan, Chennai
Related Stories
- Law Minister's Vision Statement- larger judiciary, work till midnight, case not to exceed 3 years
- Bhopal Gas Tragedy Verdict: SC dismisses CBI’s curative petition for harsher punishment
- 10 and counting... Supreme Court admits Ram Murti's petition against 377 judgement
- Talwar Thakore advise on 2009's largest QIP- Axis Bank raises 3490 crores
- 20 years of Sachin 'Ton'dulkar - Legal tussles: Ferrari, CA, National Flag and Terrorists
- 25 Years after Indira Gandhi: The lawyers in the Indira Gandhi Murder Trial and the 1984 Riots
- Justice Katju's recusal brings RIL-BPCL dispute back to square one after six years in SC
Other News
- Re-Upped Round up May 23
- Alternative Law Forum to hold 2 day course on ‘Free Speech law in India’
- BCI to start Phase-Wise Agitation to oppose Higher Education Bill; July 11 and 12 to be Protest Days; Dharna at Jantar mantar in August
- End of Venture Capital Fund Regulations; SEBI notifies Alternate Investment Fund Regulations
- SILF supports Nariman for President of India; Says no one knows the working of the Constitution better
- Re-Upped Round up May 22
- Supreme Court Lawyers Welfare Trust encourages young talent; Introduces 2 annual fellowships
The Viewpoint: Indemnification Provisions - Is the fight on the indemnity clause worth the effort?
May 17, 2012 | Bar & Bench brings to you the twentieth article on 'The Viewpoint' series with its Knowledge Partner AZB & Partners. AZB Senior Associate Nandish Vyas and Associate Pranati Ishwar in this article seek to examine the context in which indemnification rights are relevant for acquisition transactions, and also seek to explore if there are areas where they are potentially not worth the comments (4)










