Twitter
Advertisement

Uphaar case: Ansal claims no negligence

Sushil Ansal, facing trial in the 1997 Uphaar cinema fire case, concluded his arguments before a court that there was no 'legal or factual' against him in the incident.

Latest News
article-main
FacebookTwitterWhatsappLinkedin

NEW DELHI: Sushil Ansal, facing trial in the 1997 Uphaar cinema fire case, on Friday concluded his arguments before a court here claiming there was no 'legal or factual' basis for a case of negligence against him in the incident which claimed 59 lives.

Rebutting the prosecution's charges before Additional Sessions Judge Mamta Sehgal, Ansal's counsel Rakesh Dwivedi contended that there was no evidence that any act of his client was direct and efficient cause of the deaths.

The counsel said the degree of negligence was required to be high and gross to attract criminal liability under the penal laws and cited various Supreme Court judgements in support of the argument.

Reiterating his earlier stand, Ansal also contended that he had seized to be the Director or licensee of Uphaar Cinema over eight years ago before the fateful incident and it was owned by a company.

He denied the CBI's claim of his having installed a DVB transformer, which had allegedly caused the blaze in the hall, claiming he was forced by then state-owned Delhi Electricity Supply Undertaking (DESU) to give his nod for its installation.

The accused also termed as 'untrue' the allegations that the seating capacity in the theatre was illegally expanded and contended that it was done after due sanction from concerned authorities.

Countering the prosecution's contention of poor safety measures in Uphaar at the time of the incident, Ansal referred to the inspection report of the fire department which stated that the safety equipment were found to be in working order.

Find your daily dose of news & explainers in your WhatsApp. Stay updated, Stay informed-  Follow DNA on WhatsApp.
Advertisement

Live tv

Advertisement
Advertisement