Supreme Court sticks to sense in Uphaar case
The Supreme Court's imposition of a Rs60 crore fine on Sushil and Gopal Ansal, for their mismanagement of Delhi's Uphaar Cinema which caught fire and turned into a death-trap, is possibly the most humane outcome that could have emerged from that terrible tragedy, which claimed the lives of 59 people in 1997. The money will be used by the Delhi Government to set up a trauma centre, and it comes in addition to the compensation amounts already awarded to victims and their next of kin in a civil liability case.
There is disappointment in some circles, particularly among those who lost their loved ones in the accident, that the Ansals will not be serving any jail time, even after being convicted for criminal negligence leading to deaths. However, it is important to view their guilt and culpability in context. The Ansals did not commit pre-meditated murder, and they were cleared of the charge of culpable homicide not amounting to murder. Also, they were not the only ones responsible for the deaths. The civic authorities, for example, were just as much to blame for allowing flagrant violation of building rules and laws, that made it near impossible for the patrons, packed in much over-permissible limits, to escape, when the building went up in flames.
The fire itself was the result of a poorly maintained transformer that burst in an over-crowded car park. This list can go on, but the bottom line is that the Ansals alone were not entirely or even directly responsible for the tragedy. Of course, they had a moral responsibility to ensure the well-being of their patrons, and as the Sessions Court had observed, they were reckless in ignoring pre-established security measures for the sake of expanding profit margins. For this, they have been punished in keeping with the law.
True, the option of a higher quantum of punishment (two years in prison) was available, but the court has rightly decided that the two men, who had previously served brief periods behind bars, and one of whom is of advancing age, need not be incarcerated. Also, this decision was taken after lengthy deliberations and much debate. After the Supreme Court upheld the duo’s conviction in March 2014, the two-judge Bench hearing the case could not agree on the quantum of jail term for the Ansals. The matter was referred to a three-judge Bench, which gave its decision on Wednesday. A well-balanced and measured verdict, it upholds the principles of justice and is befitting a civilised society. Perhaps, it would have been easier to rule in favour of incarceration, especially given how much resentment there is among the public against the Ansals, but the judges have shown restraint and resisted demands for ‘off with their heads'-style justice.
In the final tally, there is no way to compensate for the lives that were lost that fateful evening on June 13, 1997. One can only try to ensure that their lives were not lost in vain. The trauma centre, which will be established using the fine paid by the Ansal brothers and should have a significant and long-lasting social impact, is one step in that direction. Another will be to ensure that the mistakes made at Uphaar, be they by the Ansals or the civic authorities, are not repeated, and public safety is not compromised.