In a significant development, Delhi’s Tis Hazari court granted bail to Manuj Kathuria, the SUV driver implicated in the deaths of three UPSC aspirants at a coaching centre in Old Rajinder Nagar. The tragic incident, which resulted from Kathuria allegedly driving in a rash and negligent manner, causing water to flood the basement, led to severe consequences and raised many questions about accountability.
Additional Sessions Judge Rakesh Kumar-IV granted bail to Manuj Kathuria on a bail bond of Rs 50,000 along with a surety of the same amount. However, the bail bond could not be furnished immediately as the judicial magistrate had concluded his duties for the day by the time the order was issued.
Judge Kumar noted that the current evidence suggested Kathuria was over-enthusiastically implicated under section 105 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), which is non-bailable.
Reviewing CCTV footage from July 27, 2024, at 6:45 PM, Judge Kumar observed that there was no substantial evidence implicating Kathuria at a specific time during the incident.
The court also noted that the state, through its reply, indicated that the non-bailable offence under section 105 BNSS 2023 was not established at this stage, making the remaining charges bailable. Consequently, the court granted interim bail based on the current allegations.
The Delhi police, in their status report on Kathuria's bail plea, stated they were not pursuing charges under section 105 (Culpable Homicide not amounting to murder) of the BNSS. The accused's counsel argued that with all the remaining charges being bailable, Kathuria’s bail was a right.
This decision follows the Tis Hazari court’s previous dismissal of bail applications for Kathuria and four others involved in the case. The court, in its earlier decision, highlighted CCTV footage showing Kathuria driving his vehicle on a heavily waterlogged road, leading to significant water displacement.
This action caused the gate of the coaching centre to give way, resulting in the basement flooding and the subsequent tragic loss of three lives. The footage also showed that Kathuria ignored warnings from a passerby about the potential danger.
The bail plea also addressed the widespread circulation of CCTV videos on social media, noting that the police relied on three specific videos which were not provided to the accused. Kathuria, represented by advocates Rakesh Malhotra and RK Tripathi, had previously filed a similar bail application. His defence argued there was no evidence of overspeeding and that the allegations were speculative.
During bail arguments, Kathuria’s counsel emphasised that he was not booked for negligent or rash driving, challenging the applicability of the non-bailable offence under section 105 BNSS. The defence also requested the preservation and production of additional CCTV footage from the coaching centre and its vicinity to provide a complete context of the incident.
Kathuria’s counsel further argued that the real culprits were the coaching centre and civic authorities for failing to address the waterlogging issue. The defence highlighted Kathuria’s medical history, suggesting that continued custody could lead to health complications.
On the other hand, Additional Public Prosecutor (APP) Atul Shrivastava opposed the bail application, presenting evidence of Kathuria’s fondness for off-road vehicles and suggesting that he should have been more cautious given the waterlogged conditions. The APP emphasised that the investigation was still in its early stages and that Kathuria could potentially influence witnesses if released.
The tragic incident at the coaching centre has sparked a broader conversation about safety, accountability, and the need for better infrastructure management. As the investigation continues, the court’s decision to grant bail to Kathuria underscores the complexities of the case and the importance of thorough judicial scrutiny in such matters.
Follow us
