Bombay High Court confirms bail of bistro co-owner in 2017 fire case

Petitioner is accused in a fire that claimed 14 lives and injured more than 50

July 06, 2022 06:09 pm | Updated 08:08 pm IST - Mumbai

A view of Mojo’s Bistro where, a fire on December 29, 2017, claimed 14 lives. File

A view of Mojo’s Bistro where, a fire on December 29, 2017, claimed 14 lives. File | Photo Credit: Arunangsu Roy Chowdhury

The Bombay High Court confirmed the bail of Yug Tuli, co-owner of Mojo Bistro at Kamala Mills, an accused in the fire that claimed 14 lives and injured more than 50 on December 31, 2017.

A Single Bench of Justice A.S. Gadkari had rejected Mr. Tuli’s bail on April 27, 2018, and he challenged the order before the Supreme Court. The apex court dismissed his plea and granted him liberty to move a fresh application for bail after three months. He filed a fresh bail application before the trial court. That too, however, was rejected on October 24, 2018. He then moved the High Court and the next date set for a hearing was January 4, 2018.

Justice Gadkari recorded in the order: “Supreme Court having regard to the peculiar facts of the present case and also the fact that Mr. Tuli was in Jail for almost 11 months, directed to release him on interim bail till the matter is taken up by the High Court.”

Senior advocate Rajiv Chavan appearing for Mr. Tuli informed the court that all the accused in the case were out on bail, and co-owner Yug Pathak had also been released on bail by the Supreme Court on December 14, 2018.

The Bench noted: “Mr Tuli is on interim bail since December 2018 and there is no report of breach of any of the conditions imposed upon him. As noted earlier, Mr Pathak was released on bail and therefore Mr Tuli deserves to be released on bail on the ground of parity.”

The Bench confirmed Mr. Tuli’s bail on June 22. However, the order was made available on Wednesday.

Mr. Tuli, 29, surrendered before the N. M. Joshi Marg Police Station after his anticipatory bail was rejected. A ‘Look Out Notice’ was also issued against him as he was charged with culpable homicide not amounting to murder.

0 / 0
Sign in to unlock member-only benefits!
  • Access 10 free stories every month
  • Save stories to read later
  • Access to comment on every story
  • Sign-up/manage your newsletter subscriptions with a single click
  • Get notified by email for early access to discounts & offers on our products
Sign in

Comments

Comments have to be in English, and in full sentences. They cannot be abusive or personal. Please abide by our community guidelines for posting your comments.

We have migrated to a new commenting platform. If you are already a registered user of The Hindu and logged in, you may continue to engage with our articles. If you do not have an account please register and login to post comments. Users can access their older comments by logging into their accounts on Vuukle.