[Uphaar Cinema Tragedy] Delhi Police opposes release of Ansal Brothers before Delhi High Court

The Delhi Police on Thursday vehemently opposed the release of the Ansal brothers, who were recently convicted for evidence tampering in connection with the 1997 Uphaar Cinema fire tragedy case (Sushil Ansal vs. State of NCT of Delhi) .

. The Bench of Justice Subramonium Prasad was hearing the Ansal brothers' appeal against a trial court order which had declined to suspend their seven-year sentence for evidence tampering in the Uphaar Cinema case.

. During the course of the hearing, the Court discussed the suggestion of releasing the Ansal brothers on interim bail, owing to their old age and the escalating COVID-19 situation, while maintaining that the trial court would still decide their appeal against conviction.

Justice Prasad also mentioned that during the first and second waves, other accused convicted for the same offences had been released on bail.

. Appearing on behalf of the Delhi Police, Senior Advocate Dayan Krishnan raised serious objections to the release of the Ansal Brothers.

"We have serious objections to the release. There are doctors in jail. There are even hospitals in jail. COVID-19 cannot be a ground for the suspension of their sentence. Moreover, this is a policy decision. One convict cannot be prioritised over another. The nature of offences in this case was such that the entire system was put in peril", Krishnan argued.

. Senior Advocate Arvind Nigam , appearing on behalf of Sushil Ansal, argued against the invocation of Section 201 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), which outlines the offence of tampering of evidence.

Nigam argued that Section 201 cannot be invoked in the present case as the provision does not deal with documents.

"Why would I tamper with a document I have already admitted to in Court?", Nigam also asked.

Thereafter, he submitted that the petitioner was currently ailing, 82 years of age and was already serving a sentence on the charge of evidence tampering.

. Senior Advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi , appearing on behalf of Gopal Ansal, argued that his client is not just a senior citizen, but a "super-senior citizen" and urged the Court to exercise its wide and liberal discretion to release him.

"There is an inevitable long pendency of appeals before the trial courts and even during trial in this case. My client is at the wrong end of the stick due to excessive media attention in this case, though I'm not blaming anybody here," Singhvi submitted.

The Court was apprised of the fact that in the main case, the Ansal brothers were convicted and sentenced to a two-year jail term by the Supreme Court, which later released them subject to the payment of a ₹ 30 Crore fine on each of them.

. Senior Advocate Vikas Pahwa represented the complainant, Association of the Victims of Uphaar Tragedy (AVUT).

. After hearing the parties, the Court said,

"I'm sitting on a revision of the sessions court order. Unless that order is so perverse or shocking, why should we change it?"

The Court said that the files related to this case had gone missing and that there were serious allegations of conspiracy and evidence tampering against the main accused.

It eventually ordered the prosecution to file its rejoinder and listed the matter for further arguments on January 12.

. Earlier this month, the Ansal brothers had moved a plea for suspension of their sentences before the Patiala House Sessions Court. However, the same was dismissed by Additional Session Judge Anil Antil , who noted in his order that there was " no prima facie illegality or impropriety " in the sentencing judgment or the conviction order.

. Last month, a Delhi court sentenced the Ansal brothers to seven years' imprisonment and a ₹2.25 crore fine each for tampering with evidence in the Uphaar Cinema fire tragedy case.

"The foundation of judiciary is premised on the trust and confidence of the people and any action which is aimed to thwart it is required to be dealt with the utmost strictness," the Court of Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (CMM) Pankaj Sharma had ordered in this case.

The case arose from a devastating fire at the Uphaar Cinema on June 13, 1997, that took 59 lives and left several people injured.

.Uphaar Fire Tragedy: The mother who still finds strength from children she lost two decades ago

[Uphaar Cinema Tragedy] Delhi Police opposes release of Ansal Brothers before Delhi High Court

Khadija Khan

Related Stories