Delhi IAS training centre: Court denies bail to four co-owners of a basement in tragic flood death case of UPSC aspirants | Delhi News

Coaching centre in Old Rajender Nagar where three UPSC aspirants died in rainwater floods last month

NEW DELHI: A Court in Delhi on Friday, while he was evicting four co-owners of a basement of a building in which three UPSC aspirants died of Rainwater flooding in a coaching center in Old Rajender Nagar Last month they said they were “not solely responsible for the incident.”
The court of Main district and Special Judge Anju Bajaj Chandna in his 14-page order delivered on Friday said, “Before passing this order, I consider it important to state that the petitioners are not solely responsible for the incident. The role of the MCD officials in keeping the case of illegal use of the basement in abeyance without taking any action and particularly paying no attention to the recent complaint of Kishore Singh Kushwaha speaks volumes about their complicity. This court sincerely hopes that the CBI will investigate the case thoroughly and thoroughly and bring all the culprits to book.”
On August 17, the court had stayed the bail plea of ​​four co-owners of the basement – Sarabjeet Singh, Tejinder Singh, Harinder Singh and Parminder Singh – who were arrested on July 28. On July 31, a district court rejected the bail pleas of SUV driverManuj Kathuria and Keller Co-owner – Tejinder Singh, Parvinder Singh, Harvinder Singh and Sarabjeet Singh. Kathuria was later released on bail.
The court in the order noted that on June 27, just a month before the incident, Kishore Singh Kushwaha, a resident of Karol Bagh, had brought the incident to the attention of the authorities by complaining specifically against Rau's IAS for running a classroom in the basement without permission and expressing apprehension about a possible serious accident. “Despite reminders to this effect in July, it is painful to note that the authorities continued to hold back the said complaint and did not take immediate action, otherwise precious lives could have been saved,” the court said.
The court acknowledged that the co-owners had surrendered to the police, but said that this fact “would not be sufficient to grant them bail as the CBI investigation is still in its initial and crucial stages and important evidence is being collected and witnesses are being examined”.
The court stated that the violation of building regulations and the interference with the sewage system must be investigated and the specific role of the applicants must be determined.
“As for the arguments of knowledge and its extent, I am of the opinion that for the punishment of intentional killing, which does not qualify as murder, it is not necessary that the perpetrator knew the exact event or incident. Knowledge means being aware of the possibility of such an incident. It is enough that the perpetrators knew that they were endangering the lives of others by allowing the illegal use of the basement. Allowing the illegal use of the basement has a direct connection with the regrettable incident,” the court noted.
Regarding the failure of the municipal authorities and the sewerage system, the court said that while the system contributed “significantly” to the incident, this did not diminish the culpability of the basement's co-owners, especially when the failure of the stormwater drains was mainly due “to interference and obstruction.”
The court also addressed the argument of the direct and immediate connection between the rental of the basement and the incident in question, finding that the basement was used for activities in which “a large number of students were present for long periods of time, in violation of safety regulations.”
“If a common man like Kishore Kumar Kushwaha could sense and foresee the danger, the owner/occupier of the building was more likely to be aware of the risks involved. Therefore, the plea that no knowledge of intentional killing can be attributed to the owners is baseless or without merit, particularly when the owners reside in the same locality and are aware of the peculiar circumstances,” the court said.
The court stated that the co-owners' liability arose from their “unlawful act” of allowing the use of the basement for a training institute, noting that according to the use permit dated August 9, 2021, the basement could only be used as a storage room, while the owners had allowed the use of the basement for a training institute when executing the lease agreement dated January 5, 2022.
“The complainants have thus violated the cellar usage regulations,” the court found.
The court also observed that on August 4, 2023, about a year before the incident, the Deputy Commissioner of the Municipal Corporation of Delhi issued a notice asking the owner/occupier of the building in question to stop the misuse and stated that the notice was served by posting it on the property.
“It is not credible that the owners were unaware of the notice dated August 4, 2023, since as owners and beneficiaries of the property, they must have been informed of the delivery of the notice dated August 4, 2023. Neither the owners nor the occupier of the building complied with the said notice. No justification is given for non-compliance with the notice,” the court stated in the order.