Uphaar case: Police oppose suggestion to release Ansal brothers

The high court suggested releasing the Ansal brothers on an interim basis given their age and the prevailing Covid-19 situation. The two businessmen were convicted and sentenced in a case of tampering with the case in Uphaar fire incident.

The Delhi Police on Thursday strongly objected after the Delhi high court suggested releasing real estate barons Sushil and Gopal Ansal, citing their advanced age, on interim bail in a case of tampering with the evidence in the Uphaar fire tragedy.

A fire broke out in South Delhi's Uphaar Cinema on June 13, 1997, claiming 59 lives. The Delhi high court suggested on Thursday to release Gopal and Sushil Ansal on account of advanced age and the prevailing Covid situation. (HT Photo)

Justice Subramonium Prasad was hearing a plea by the Ansal brothers for suspension of their seven-year jail terms. The judge suggested releasing them on an interim basis given their age and the prevailing Covid-19 situation, and asked the trial court to decide their petition against conviction in the case. Gopal Ansal is 79 years old, and his bother Sushil is 82 years old.

The judge also observed that even during the previous two waves of the pandemic, persons involved in offences for which the two petitioners are convicted, were released on bail.

Opposing the suggestion, senior advocate Dayan Krishnan, who was representing the prosecution, said the petitioners would get the benefit of any policy of release of inmates after it is formulated by the authorities concerned, and assured that the jail doctors were taking all possible care of the petitioners who had “nothing special about them”.

“Whether there is a second wave or a third wave, it is really something which is a policy decision and not about an individual person. A convict cannot be better than the other. When a policy (on release due to Covid-19) comes, they will get the benefit,” Krishnan submitted.

Krishnan argued that the nature of offences by the Ansal brothers was such that the “entire system was put in peril” and the medical condition of the petitioner during the pandemic cannot be a ground for their release.

“We have serious objections. There are jail doctors, jail hospitals...they are taking every possible care.It can’t be a ground for suspension..The nature of offence (was such that) it is shocking to one’s conscience. The entire system was put in peril,” he added.

On December 3, a sessions court rejected a plea by the two brothers to suspend their conviction and jail term in the case related to tampering with the evidence, and refused to release them on bail. Subsequently, the Ansals moved the high court which sought responses from the city police and the complainant, Association of Victims of Uphaar Tragedy (AVUT).

Senior advocate Arvind Nigam, representing Sushil Ansal, contended that the “mutilated” documents were not even relevant to his culpability in the main Uphaar trial and his conviction in the evidence tampering case was a “travesty of justice”.

The senior lawyer submitted that secondary evidence was recorded on the missing issues and the same was not objected to during trial. He said that his client was over 80 years of age, and suffered from various ailments.

Senior counsel Abhishek Manu Singhvi, appearing for Gopal Ansal, also argued that his client was over 70 years and the court should exercise its wide and liberal discretion to release him. He emphasised that there was an “inevitable long pendency of appeals” before the trial courts and even during trial, Gopal Ansal was on bail.

A magisterial court sentenced them on November 8 last year to seven-year in jail and imposed a fine of ₹2.25 crore each on them. The case was lodged on the direction of the Delhi high court on a petition by AVUT chairperson Neelam Krishnamoorthy.

A fire broke out at the Uphaar cinema on June 13, 1997, claiming 59 lives.