[Uphaar Tragedy tampering case] Stan Swamy, OP Chautala were denied bail despite old age: Victims to Delhi High Court

Challenging the release of the Ansal brothers in the Uphaar tragedy evidence tampering case on account of their old age, a plea before the Delhi High Court has referred to the cases of Father Stan Swamy and former Haryana chief minister OP Chautala to argue that courts have denied them bail despite their old age [AVUT v. State of NCT Delhi]..The revision plea filed by the Association of Victims of Uphaar Tragedy (AVUT), to be heard by Justice Asha Menon on September 5, challenges the July 19 order of Principal District and Sessions Judge Dharmesh Sharma..In November 2021, a magistrate court in Delhi had awarded a seven-year jail sentence to the Ansals along with ₹2.25 crore fine each for tampering with evidence in the fire tragedy case. Much to the dismay of the victims, in July this year, the sessions court sentenced Gopal and Sushil Ansal to the period already undergone and ordered their release.Judge Sharma had modified the sentences of Gopal and Sushil Ansal, holding the same to be disproportionate to the offence committed and retributive in nature, so as to teach the Ansal brothers a lesson.At the same time, the Court had dismissed the appeals of Ansal brothers..Before the High Court, AVUT argued,“While applying criminal test the age of the accused cannot not be the only factor especially in the present case where the convicted persons namely Sushil and Gopal Ansal have committed the offence of tampering at the age of 63 and 53 respectively and then have procrastinated the trial themselves.”.It also added,“Indian Courts have denied bail to many accused persons in their old age, one example being that of Father Stan Swamy among others to whom the benefit of old age was not given. O P Chautala was another example. Therefore the Principal District and Session Judge erred in reducing the sentence of all the convicts due to the old age of the two convicts.”.The Association has also contended that protection of society and stamping out criminal proclivity must be the object of law and the same ought to be achieved by imposing appropriate sentence.“Therefore, law as a cornerstone of the edifice of ‘order’ should meet the challenges confronting the society.”.AVUT, therefore, sought the restoration of the original punishment of 7 years awarded by the magistrate court..The Ansals and others have essentially spent about 8 months in prison after their conviction and sentencing by the trial court.Other convicts PP Batra, Dinesh Chandra Sharma and Singh were awarded the same jail term, but slapped with a ₹3 lakh fine each.The case stems from a fire that took place at Delhi's Uphaar Cinema on June 13, 1997, taking 59 lives and leaving several people injured. The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), after completing its investigation, had submitted a chargesheet against Sushil Ansal, Gopal Ansal and other accused.An inquiry was ordered by a court in 2003 after some documents related to the Uphaar tragedy case went missing from the court record room. Upon conclusion of the inquiry, the court employee was dismissed..Senior Advocate Vikas Pahwa and Advocate Raavi Sharma are representing AVUT.