The CBI on Friday filed a petition in the Supreme Court seeking review of the judgment imposing Rs 30 crore as compensation on each of the Ansal brothers in the Uphaar tragedy case and reducing the sentence to the one already undergone by them.
In its petition, the CBI said “the impugned order after having enhanced the sentence of both the accused to two years, substitutes the remaining sentence to be undergone with the sentence already undergone on payment of an amount of Rs 30 crore each. This substitution of remaining sentence on payment of Rs 30 crore has resulted in miscarriage of justice.”
The CBI pointed that the two accused — Gopal Ansal and Sushil Ansal — had continuously violated every law on public safety for personal gain with scant regard to the safety of their patrons despite repeated warnings and that the age of the accused should not and cannot be factored in the present case as a mitigating circumstance. The incident occurred in 1997. The matter has been contested by the CBI and supported by the victims’ group vigorously. The trial was successfully delayed by the accused until such time as a directive was issued by the high court to speed up the trial. It said considering the complexity of the facts, and the pressures upon the judicial system, the trial took considerable time, and throughout this period the accused were on bail and carrying on merrily in life. The fire safety rules were flouted with impunity for years by the accused who are, on their own assertion, extremely affluent builders. It would be a wrong message that a tortuous trial ends in a mere monetary fine which can easily be afforded by the accused and such a monetary fine is considered adequate to meet the ends of justice and the rule of law.
The CBI faulted the court for not granting sufficient time to put forth its arguments adequately and properly. Due to the paucity of time on the day on which this case was heard, the prosecution could not adequately put across reasons as to why this court should not substitute a monetary fine in place of a jail sentence.
Submitting that there was an apparent error in the judgment, the CBI said, “This case represents an unfortunate instance of greed and avarice getting the better of good sense, on account of which persons who claim to be well placed and respected in society, flouted with impunity rules put in place by the law to safeguard public safety. The callousness of the accused — held by the trial court, the high court, and this court to be criminal negligence — resulted in 59 people being trapped in the balcony of the theatre and suffocating to death, only because the accused had not followed the rules which enjoin features which would enable the public visiting such public places to evacuate with safety.”
