Delhi court grants bail to SUV driver arrested for alleged role in drowning of UPSC aspirants
He was accused of driving his car through a waterlogged street, which allegedly led to the basement of a coaching centre getting flooded.
A Delhi court on Thursday granted bail to a businessman arrested for his alleged role in the drowning of three Union Public Service Commission aspirants at a private coaching centre in New Delhi’s Old Rajinder Nagar on July 27, reported PTI.
This came after the Delhi Police told the court that they have decided to drop the charge of culpable homicide not amounting to murder against the man, Manuj Kathuria.
Kathuria was accused of driving his sports utility vehicle through a street adjoining the coaching centre that was flooded by rainwater, causing the water to swell and breach the gates of the building and inundate its basement.
The investigating officer on Thursday said that at this stage, there is not enough evidence to establish the charge of culpable homicide not amounting to murder against Kathuria.
A magisterial court had on Wednesday denied bail to the businessman, after which he approached the sessions court.
The police told the sessions court on Thursday that the charges against Kathuria can be better assessed when an expert team from the Indian Institute of Technology-Delhi conducts an investigation and submits its findings.
The primary offence against Kathuria now is rash driving or riding on public roads.
Kathuria was arrested on Monday along with four co-owners of the basement, namely Parvinder Singh, Harvinder Singh, Sarabjit Singh and Tajinder Singh, reported Live Law.
On Wednesday, the magisterial court had denied bail to Kathuria, saying the plea was untenable at this stage and describing the offence as serious, reported PTI.
This came hours after the Delhi High Court had said that the police was running a strange investigation by arresting the driver.
“What are the police doing catching passersby-a driver saying 'because you have passed so water has entered the basement'?” the court asked, reported Live Law. “Have you questioned a person who has not done the desilting?”