Noida techie death: Realtor gets pre-arrest bail

Noida: An additional sessions court on Thursday granted anticipatory bail to Lotus Greens founder Nirmal Singh, who is named in an FIR in connection with the death of software engineer Yuvraj Mehta in a waterlogged pit in Sector 150 on Jan 17.Singh had been untraceable since Jan 23, when a non-bailable warrant was issued against him. His lawyers told the court the FIR and investigation material did not disclose any cognisable offence against him, and that arrests should not be used routinely.
Singh faces allegations under the Environment Protection Act, 1986, the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974, and BNS sections 290 (negligence in building construction or demolition), 270 (public nuisance) and 125 (negligence endangering human life).Granting relief, judge Atul Srivastava said that considering "the facts and circumstances, the nature of accusations, the punishment prescribed, the absence of prima facie involvement, and that no recovery is to be made from the applicant", it was a fit case to extend the "protective umbrella of anticipatory bail".The judge ordered that Singh must not "directly or indirectly" induce or threaten anyone connected with the case to stop them from disclosing facts to the court. It also restricted foreign travel without permission. In the event of arrest, Singh is to be released on a personal bond of Rs 30,000 with two sureties of the same amount.Singh's counsel argued that employees of M/s Lotus Green Constructions Private Limited were "illegally implicated and arrested" but later granted bail."The investigating officer was extensively examined by the CJM court, with no satisfactory material emerging to show involvement," the lawyer said.District govt counsel Brahmjeet Singh opposed the plea, saying the developer did not deserve bail.The judge observed that a key issue was how accumulated water could have been drained out when construction and allied activities had been restrained by Noida Authority itself."In such circumstances, it cannot, at this stage, be inferred that the applicant intentionally allowed water to accumulate," the court said.The court also noted Singh was not the owner, director or person-in-charge controlling the company at the relevant time, and that the firm had transferred 70% shares and 100% beneficial and voting rights to Wiz Town, with statutory information furnished to the ministry concerned. It further recorded that Singh had neither actual nor constructive possession, nor effective dominion over the land where the accident occurred.