- Home
- /
- News Updates
- /
- Uphaar Fire Tragedy: Delhi Court...
Uphaar Fire Tragedy: Delhi Court Releases Ansal Brothers For Jail Term Already Undergone In Evidence Tampering Case
Nupur Thapliyal
19 July 2022 5:44 PM IST
After upholding the conviction of real estate barons Sushil Ansal and Gopal Ansal in the evidence tampering case in connection with the Uphaar fire tragedy that happened in the year 1997, a Delhi Court on Tuesday released them as against the jail term already undergone by them.The development came after District Judge Dharmesh Sharma of the Patiala House Courts yesterday dismissed the...
After upholding the conviction of real estate barons Sushil Ansal and Gopal Ansal in the evidence tampering case in connection with the Uphaar fire tragedy that happened in the year 1997, a Delhi Court on Tuesday released them as against the jail term already undergone by them.
The development came after District Judge Dharmesh Sharma of the Patiala House Courts yesterday dismissed the appeals filed by Ansals' challenging their conviction and seven year jail term.
The Court, which was deciding the quantum of sentence, took into consideration Ansals' old age. However, the Judge upheld the fine imposed on the brothers.
CMM Pankaj Sharma had convicted Ansals and others under Sections 201 (tampering of evidence), 120B (criminal conspiracy) and 409 (criminal breach of trust by public servant) of the Indian Penal Code.
On 13 June 1997, 59 lives were lost and 103 people were injured in the fire of Uphaar Cinema, where audience was watching that year's biggest Bollywood blockbuster, Border, during an afternoon screening.
After 95 hearings, the Ansals were finally convicted, to seven years in prison on 8 November 2021, in evidence tampering case, the Court also imposes a fine of Rs 2.5 crore on each of the Ansals.
The court also gave 7-year-jail terms to former court staff Dinesh Chand Sharma and two others - PP Batra and Anoop Singh and imposed a fine of ₹3 lakh on each of them.
Earlier, the High Court had dismissed the duo's plea for suspension of sentence, stating that the same would amount to eroding the faith of the public in the judicial system as it would entail allowing convicts to take advantage of the passage of time as well as the judiciary as an institution.