A Delhi court which heard Shankar Mishra’s bail plea on Monday reserved its order and will pronounce it on Tuesday. Mishra, who was accused of urinating on an elderly woman co-passenger in an Air India flight from New York to Delhi while inebriated, had approached Delhi’s Patiala Court seeking regular bail.
The case was heard in Delhi’s Patiala Court by additional sessions Judge Harjyot Singh Bhalla. Senior Advocate Ramesh Gupta appeared for Shankar Mishra along with advocates Ishanee Sharma and Akshat Bajpai.
Police have opposed the bail application, saying India has been defamed internationally because of the incident. “India ki itni badnaami hui iss maamle mein, (India was defamed a lot in this case)," they said.
“Its the exhibition of private parts which can come under IPC section 509 (word, gesture or act intended to outrage modesty of a woman). Whether it is young woman or old woman won’t be relevant in determining the offence in case of a sexual offence," Judge Bhalla noted.
“It may be disgusting, that’s a different matter. You may be disgusted by an act, that’s different from the law. Let’s see how law deals with it… section 354 (assault or criminal force with intent to outrage modesty) is graver form of offence. If it falls under 509 then we’ll see, if there’s 354 and if there’s case of a graver offence," he said.
How was the FIR leaked in the media if the case was so sensitive, the Judge asked. He further noted that there is a contradiction in the statement given by the complainant and by Ila Banerjee, the passenger seated next to her.
“As on date, your (prosecution’s) witness is not even deposing in your favour," the Judge observed.
Arguing on behalf of Mishra, senior advocate Ramesh Gupta said that he couldn’t be termed as “absconding" just because he didn’t appear on summons. “My boarding pass also had a Bengaluru address…I accept that I didn’t appear and they can arrest, but anyone would try for anticipatory (bail)…this can’t be called absconding," he said.
Gupta further took the court through the FIR and said that the complainant had sought reimbursement for the ticket but had not sought any action against him.
The bail order will be pronounced on Tuesday, Jan 31 by the court.
Bail Hearing Adjourned Earlier
Mishra was arrested from Bengaluru on January 6 and was sent to 14-day judicial custody the next day, which was extended by Delhi’s Patiala House court on January 21 for another two weeks. His bail hearing was taken up by the court on Jan 27, which was then adjourned to Jan 30.
The hearing was adjourned to January 30 as the counsel for complainant informed the court that the investigating officer is not in town, which Mishra’s lawyer termed “unfair”.
The fresh plea challenges the order of a magistrate court, which had denied him bail while observing that his act was “disgusting and repulsive".
“The alleged act of accused of relieving himself upon the complainant is utterly disgusting and repulsive. The alleged act in itself is sufficient to outrage the modesty of any woman," metropolitan magistrate Komal Garg had said while denying bail to Mishra.
In its order dated January 11, the court had said, “Egregious conduct of the accused has shocked the civic consciousness and needs to be deprecated."
It was also noted that the accused had failed to join the investigation even after a notice under Section 41A of the Code of Criminal Procedure. “Therefore, the conduct of the accused does not inspire confidence,” the judge had stated.
Read all the Latest India News here