Uphaar tragedy: Why the SC allowed Ansals to pay Rs 30 cr each and walk free

Sushil Ansal and Gopal Ansal, the owners of Uphaar Cinema in New Delhi, faced the possibility of a few more months in jail when their appeal came up for hearing before the Supreme Court. But over 18 years after the tragic fire in the cinema killed 59, the Supreme Court observed that it had to limit itself to the choice available under the law and said that if the Ansal brothers paid a fine of Rs 30 crore each they wouldn’t have to do any more jail time.

Sushil and Gopal Ansal were convicted for causing death by negligence, which has a maximum punishment of imprisonment of two years. They were sentenced to one year in jail by the Delhi High Court.

The three-judge bench of the Supreme Court passed the order after two judges, Justice TS Thakur and Justice Gyan Sudha Mishra, disagreed on the sentence to be imposed in the case.

Justice Mishra, who had directed the Ansal brothers to pay a fine of Rs 50 crore each in place of an additional sentence of one year, had relied on a judgment in the Bhopal gas tragedy case, in which a Madhya Pradesh court had substituted a prison sentence for the payment of compensation.

The detailed judgement released on 22 September, three days after the operative part was pronounced, and it reveals that the court decided to reduce the sentence of the Ansals to the period already undergone in jail if they agreed to pay the fine.

“We have noted the fact that as appellant no 1 (Sushil Ansal) is fairly aged, it may not be fruitful to ask him to undergo rigorous imprisonment,” the court said, while also directing Gopal Ansal to pay a fine on grounds of parity. (page 14 of the judgment)

Senior counsel Ram Jethmalani, who appeared for the brothers, had argued that out of the one year sentence awarded to them, they have been in jail for 5-6 months, and with remissions, the sentence works out to about nine months. He argued that Sushil Ansal shouldn’t have to undergo more jail time on account of his age and his brother Gopal should be exempt on grounds of parity. Remission is a provision by which the sentence of a convict is reduced based on good behavior and the amount of time that the person has already spent in jail.

While imposing the fine, the court directed that the amount should be used for setting up a new trauma centre, the court observed.

“Thus, we are of the considered opinion that ends of justice would meet if the appellants are directed to pay fine so that the amount of fine can be used either for the purpose of setting up a Trauma Centre in NCT of Delhi or for upgrading Trauma Centres of Hospitals managed in NCT of Delhi by the Government of Delhi,”

Read the full text of the judgement (with the relevant portions highlighted) below: