Satya Niketan Building collapse case: Court dismisses bail plea of Hari Ram Gupta
Patiala House Court dismissed the bail plea of Hari Ram Gupta in the Satya Niketan building collapse case, despite his medical grounds and age.
Patiala House Court has dismissed the bail plea of Hari Ram Gupta, an accused in the tragic Satya Niketan building collapse case.
Gupta, who was arrested in connection with the incident that claimed seven lives, had approached the court seeking regular bail. His legal team argued for his release based on his advanced age and ongoing medical issues, but the court found these grounds insufficient to grant him freedom at this stage of the investigation.
Medical Grounds Rejected by Court
The accused, represented by advocate Yashpal Singh, highlighted that Gupta is a super-senior citizen, aged approximately 81–82 years. The defense stated that the retired Indian Air Force Sergeant suffers from Type-2 Diabetes Mellitus and Gliptin-induced Bullous Pemphigoid, requiring regular medication including steroids.
However, the public prosecutor strongly opposed the application. Citing a medical report provided by the jail authorities, the prosecution argued that the ailments mentioned could be effectively managed by the jail dispensary while the accused remains in custody. Following a review of the medical report and submissions from both sides, Additional Sessions Judge SPS Laler dismissed the application.
Gravity of the Tragedy
The Satya Niketan building collapse, which occurred on September 6, has left a trail of devastation. The incident resulted in seven deaths and left several others injured, with one victim reportedly still in critical condition.
In previous hearings, the court had emphasized the severity of the tragedy. The court noted several key factors that weighed against granting bail:
- The investigation is currently in its initial stages, and the charge-sheet has not yet been filed.
- Gupta is the husband of Urmila Gupta, the owner of the collapsed building.
- Electricity connections for the premises are registered in his name.
- Witness statements have suggested his involvement in the work being carried out at the site.
Investigation Ongoing
The court also addressed the defense's claim that the work being performed was merely the levelling of the ground floor rather than active construction. The judge ruled that this remains a matter to be examined thoroughly during the ongoing investigation and subsequent trial.
While denying bail, the court did issue a directive to the Jail Superintendent to ensure that the applicant receives all prescribed medicines as advised, without any delay, to address his health concerns during his period of incarceration.