Delhi's Dwarka court rejected anticipatory bail pleas for contractors Himanshu and Kavish Gupta and a regular bail plea for subcontractor Rajesh Kumar in the Janakpuri biker death case, citing the gravity of the allegations and early investigation stage.
Delhi's Dwarka court on Wednesday rejected the anticipatory bail pleas of contractors Himanshu Gupta and Kavish Gupta in connection with the Janakpuri biker's death case.
The court also turned down the regular bail plea of subcontractor Rajesh Kumar, whose earlier application had already been dismissed by the magistrate's court. This case pertains to the tragic death of a biker who fallen in a pit dug by the Delhi Jal Board in the Janakpuri area last week, highlighting concerns over public safety and civic oversight.
Additional Sessions Judge (ASJ) Harleen Singh dismissed the anticipatory bail applications of the two contractors, accused in the case. They had moved court for anticipatory bail after a notice from the police to join the investigation in the biker's death case.
Detailed bail orders are to be uploaded by the court. Earlier, on February 10, the court granted interim protection from arrest to the contractors and directed them to cooperate with the investigation.
Meanwhile, subcontractor Rajesh Kumar had also moved to the sessions court for regular bail after his bail application was rejected by the Magistrate's court on February 11.
Court Cites 'Societal Interest' in Bail Rejection
While rejecting the bail plea, the court has said that "considering the totality of facts and circumstances, this court is of the view that no ground for grant of regular bail is made out at this stage."
"In cases involving loss of human life due to alleged negligence in public works, the Court must balance individual liberty with societal interest and the need for a fair and un-influenced investigation," the Judicial Magistrate First Class (JMFC) Harjot Singh Aujla had said in the order.
"Accordingly, the prayer for the grant of regular bail to accused Rajesh Kumar is hereby dismissed at this stage, " the court had said in the order.
Defense Argues Illegal Detention, Lack of Intent
During the hearing, counsel for the accused had argued that the arrest of the accused was illegal and unconstitutional.
It was also submitted that the accused was allegedly apprehended/detained on February 6; however, he was produced before the concerned court only on February 8, thereby violating the mandate of Article 22(2) of the Constitution of India as well as Cr.P.C (now BNSS), which requires production within 24 hours of arrest.
It was argued that such illegal detention vitiates the custody and the accused deserves to be released.
Counsel for the accused also submitted that the incident in question arose from an unfortunate accident related to civic excavation work and that there was no intention or knowledge attributable to the accused.
It was further contended that the accused has no prior criminal antecedents and is a permanent resident, and therefore does not pose a flight risk.
Prosecution Fears Witness Tampering, Highlights Gravity
On the other hand, the Additional Public Prosecutor (APP) had opposed the bail application on the grounds that the allegations are grave in nature, wherein a 25-year-old boy lost his life after falling into an unmanned and unsecured excavation pit.
It was also submitted that the investigation is at a nascent stage, several witnesses are yet to be examined, documents relating to the excavation work, safety compliance, contractual obligations and supervisory responsibilities are yet to be scrutinised.
He apprehended that, if released, the accused may influence witnesses, tamper with documentary evidence, and abscond to evade the process of law.
Investigation Status Key to Bail Denial
While rejecting the bail plea, the court had observed, "The investigation is admittedly at an initial stage. The IO is in the process of collecting relevant records pertaining to permissions, safety compliance, barricading arrangements, deployment of personnel and a responsibility matrix."
The court had also noted that the possibility of the accused influencing material witnesses, particularly local residents, labourers or officials associated with the project, cannot be ruled out at this juncture.
Furthermore, documentary evidence concerning the execution of civic work is susceptible to alteration or manipulation, especially when the investigation has not yet crystallised the chain of responsibility, the court said.
Other Arrests Made in the Case
Delhi police have already arrested subcontractor Rajesh Prajapati and labourer Yogesh in this case.
Yogesh has been arrested for failing to inform the police that a biker had fallen into a pit and for withholding that information. He was arrested on Sunday and sent to judicial custody on Monday.
(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by Asianet Newsable English staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)