Pee Gate accused Shankar Mishra’s reprehensible act of urinating on a female elderly passenger onboard an Air India flight has shocked the country and put the spotlight on whether in-flight liquor service policy needs to be reviewed. As Mishra was sent to sent to 14-day judicial custody after being arrested on December 6 from Bengaluru, The New Indian’s Special Correspondent Alok Singh spoke to his lawyer on whether his client feels a sense of remorse , what is the future legal course of action he would take on behalf of Mishra, and if Air India crew should be made co-accused in the case.
Excerpts from the interview.
Alok : How will you pursue the case because as far as police investigation is concerned, it is an open and shut case with all evidence out in the open?
Manu Sharma : I don’t understand what proved means (at this stage) , until it is proven in the court of law. The status of the case is that the police tried to get the custody of Mr Mishra but they could not make any ground. So, the judge deemed it fit to send him to judicial custody for 14 days. Police have a right to seek his custody. I also applied for a regular bail on which the notice has been issued and it has been kept for Wednesday (Jan 11).
Alok : Should the crew members be made co-accused in the case as the complainant said there were several lapses on their part?
Manu Sharma : It sounds absurd to make anyone else as an accused in this case. In the offence of this nature you cannot say that any one else was also held responsible for that. It may be possible, if I believe the whole allegations true, that they did noy perform their duty properly.
Alok : Air India is now changing their policy
Manu Sharma : These are their reactions, for which they are entitled to. But I don’t think the crew members are called for any criminal liability. That will be very unfortunate.
Alok : Why did this case come into the public eye after one and a half months? What took so long?
Manu Sharma : See the criminal process gets kicked in when someone raises the grievance, and goes to the public authority and says ABC is wrong and if that wrong falls in a definition of offence, then he or she can be prosecuted and bail can be denied or granted. So, someone has to raise those grievances, and in this case, for the first 35 days the complainant did not want to pursue this remedy. So it all depends on how the complainant reacts to that situation. I don’t know why she delayed it, but I don’t think there was some malicious intention or conspiracy behind hiding this matter.
Alok : Is there any sense of remorse your client feels? Does he feel ashamed?
Manu Sharma : First of all I was not able to meet my client properly. It was very crowded when he was brought to Delhi and produced before the court. I could not have one on one with him. I can personally say that if this case and facts are taken to be true, yes it’s an unfortunate incident. But the court should see reason and just apply the law as it stands.
Alok : You believe that this should not have happened?
Manu Sharma : Any citizen will say this. No one will want to go through this what the complainant had allegedly had to undergo this. I am sure if he did this, he would regret it. Let’s leave it at that. And it should not become a circus of pushing someone (Mishra), denying him the bails.
Alok : Do you think this is a case of media trail?
Manu Sharma : It happens when the media takes undue interest in any case. But I am sure people will see the reason and the media will also see reason after a while. It’s an unfortunate incident if it occurred and I hope it will have a legal and logical conclusion.