Kamala Mills fire: HC rejects bail pleas of eatery owners

They were denied bail by lower courts in April

November 02, 2018 12:59 am | Updated 12:59 am IST - Mumbai

The fire in Kamala Mills Compund in December last year claimed 14 lives.

The fire in Kamala Mills Compund in December last year claimed 14 lives.

The Bombay High Court on Thursday rejected the bail pleas of the owners of Mojo’s Bistro and 1Above, the eateries where fire broke out on December 29, 2017, killing 14 and injuring 59.

A Single-Judge Bench of Justice Prakash Naik was hearing bail applications filed by Yug Pathak (27), co-owner of Mojo’s Bistro, and Kripesh (36) and Jigar Sanghavi (37), and Abhijit Mankar (30) of 1Above. They are currently in judicial custody.

On April 11, the city civil and sessions court had rejected their bail pleas. At the time, judge S.V. Yarlagadda had ruled, “The case papers against them show that the pubs and especially hookah service were being run by violating rules.”

The court had also said, “I have noticed that the owners of both the pubs are trying to shift the burden to each other by saying that the fire emanated from other premises. Therefore, this conduct shows that they are not entitled for bail and this conduct further shows that they are influential persons.”

On April 27, High Court had also rejected the bail plea of Yug Tulli, co-owner of Mojo’s Bistro.

The owners have been charged under Sections 304 (punishment for culpable homicide not amounting to murder), 337 (causing hurt by act endangering life or personal safety of others), 338 (causing grievous hurt by act endangering life or personal safety of others), 216 (harbouring offender who has escaped from custody or whose apprehension has been ordered), 285 (negligent conduct with respect to fire or combustible matter), 420 (cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property), 465 (punishment for forgery), 466 (forgery of record of court or of public register, etc), 471 (using as genuine a forged document or electronic record), 34 (acts done by several persons in furtherance of common intention) and 36 (effect caused partly by act and partly by omission) of the Indian Penal Code.

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.