New Delhi [India], August 5 : Delhi's Patiala House Court has allowed victims of the Uphar cinema fire tragedy to assist the Prosecution in a case against businessman Sushil Ansal. He has been charged with a Passport Act case. This case is at the stage of framing charges.
This case was lodged pursuant to the order passed by the Delhi High Court on a petition moved by the Association of Victims of Uphar Tragedy (AVUT).
Chief Judicial Magistrate (CJM) Shriya Agrawal allowed the application moved by Avut seeking permission to lead evidence in the case against Sushil Ansal.
"It is observed that the Association at the instance of which the law was set into motion in the present case ought to get a right of assisting the prosecution, to which liberty, there is no bar in law," CJM Shriya Agrawal said in the order passed on Monday, August 4.
The Court ordered, "Accordingly, as opposed to being given the reins of the prosecution itself, the Association is at liberty to assist the prosecution in the present case, by accord of which participatory rights in view of settled jurisprudence on the subject, no prejudice would be caused to the accused."
AVUT had moved an application through its president, Neelam Krishnamurthy, and arguements were heard on July 19. Expressing a lack of faith in the investigating/ prosecuting agency, the plea was moved.
Senior Counsel Vikas Pahwa appeared for association and argued that the Association to be permitted to prosecute the matter considering the grievances underscored in the manner concerning the investigation and the manner in which chargesheet was eventually filed, obviating certain offences which ought to have been part of the charge sheet.
He highlighted that the present case came to be registered pursuant to an Order passed by the High Court in a petition filed by the same Association, and therefore, effective right of participation ought to be given to the association.
On the other hand, the counsel for the accused opposed the plea, arguing that the Association lacks the locus to lead the prosecution in this matter, given the peculiar allegations concerning offences under the Passports Act.
The Association in a restricted sense of the term is not a 'victim' in the present case nor can it espouse their cause, the counsel argued.