Delhi judge reserves order in bail plea of accused in Air India Urination case
A Delhi has today reserved its order in the bail plea by Shankar Mishra, who was arrested for urinating on a fellow passenger last November on board during an Air India flight under the influence of alcohol.
Additional Sessions Judge Harjyot Singh Bhalla after hearing both the sides has reserving his verdict.
The judge said that it is true that the deed was indeed disgusting but as as a matter of fact, the Court will only go by the law.
The judge said that It may be disgusting; that is another matter but let us not get into that. Let’s go into how the law deals with it.
The order is likely to be pronounced on Tuesday, January 31.
The accused is currently in judicial custody after the Metropolitan Magistrate Komal Garg dismissed his bail on January 11.
Mishra was arrested by the Delhi police in Bengaluru on January 6 for having allegedly urinated on a 70-year-old woman while in an inebriated condition.
The incident came public after the lady wrote a letter to the Tata Group chairperson was made public via the media.
In the hearing today, the Public Prosecutor (PP) has disagreed and opposed grant of bail stating the accused had initially absconded and switched off his mobile phones.
The PP also apprised the court that it was only through IMEI number that he was caught.He said that the incident has embarrassed India internationally.
The PP in his typical style said in hindi India ki international beizzati ho gayi hai sir.
The Counsel for Mishra Senior Advocate Ramesh Gupta said that the investigation is complete and crew members and other witnesses have also been questioned.
The Counsel of Mishra also submitted that Initially the bail was rejected as the investigation was pending. Now that is done and they have examined other crew members and witnesses.
Mishra, who earlier worked at Wells Fargo, was made to resign from his job as allegations against him were ‘deeply disturbing for the reputation of the organisation.
The Lawyer of Mishra had also told the Court that he had paid an agreed compensation amount to the woman on November 28, but that almost a month later on, December 19, the money was returned to him by the woman’s daughter.
The court had refused for sending Mishra to Police custody but remanded him 14 days judicial custody in its last order.
The court said that public pressure is important but it cannot sway the investigation in the case and Mishra’s police custody would not be required.