A Delhi court on Wednesday denied bail to Shankar Mishra who was arrested recently for urinating on a fellow passenger on board an Air India flight in November last year while under the influence of alcohol..The order was passed by Metropolitan Magistrate Komal Garg at the Patiala House Court after hearing the matter at length today. .During today's hearing, bail was strongly opposed by both the State as well as the complainant, with the Court being told that Mishra was highly influential and likely to influence the course of the case if he were to be released."This is highly probable that he may influence the complainant. He is a person of means and highly influential. The investigation at an initial stage," the Public Prosecutor told the Court..The counsel for the complainant told the Court,"The court has to examine whether bail can be granted to an offender who first said that he did, apologised for it but later recanted ... He is saying he was intoxicated. Intoxication can never be a defence. It is not his case that he was given liquor without his knowledge ... It was on account of his influence that Air India chose not to register an FIR ... My complaint was on 28th. It was only because of his influence that FIR took so many days.".The complainant was represented by advocates Ankur Mahindro and Rohan Taneja.Notably, they also told the Court that Mishra's father has been sending unwarranted WhatsApp messages to the complainant."The father of the accused is sending me messages in WhatsApp. He says Karma will hit me and then deletes the message. On the date of arrest he writes this message," her counsel submitted..Appearing for Mishra, advocate Manu Sharma, however, refuted these allegations outright..Sharma today pressed for bail on the ground that the guidelines for arrest as per the Supreme Court’s ruling in the Arnesh Kumar case were not followed. He further highlighted that Mishra had not made attempts to evade the inquiry process initiated by Air India in the matter while questioning the need for the issuance of a non-bailable warrant (NBW) in the case.Additionally, it was argued that when an investigation is on, magistrates should not generally get into the arena of aiding the investigation.Sharma also contended that Mishra's actions, while obscene, were not intended to sexually harass the victim..Mishra was arrested by the Delhi police in Bengaluru on Friday night for having allegedly urinated on a 70-year-old woman while in an inebriated condition in November on board an Air India flight.The incident came to light after the woman's letter to the Tata Group chairperson was made public via the media.Mishra, who worked at Wells Fargo, was also let go from his job after the company said that allegations against him were "deeply disturbing"..A statement was recently put out by Mishra's lawyers stating that he had paid an agreed compensation amount to the woman on November 28, but that almost a month later on, December 19, the money was returned to him by the woman's daughter.On January 8, the court had refused to send Mishra to Police custody but remanded him 14 days judicial custody.The court had then said that the mere fact that there is public pressure should not sway the investigation in the case and Mishra's police custody would not be required.
