Delhi Court Denies Anticipatory Bail to Contractors in Janakpuri Pit Death Case
In a significant development, a Delhi court has refused to grant anticipatory bail to contractors Himanshu Gupta and Kavish Gupta in connection with the Janakpuri pit death case. The court emphasized that their custodial interrogation is essential due to the seriousness of the offense, which cannot be overlooked.
Court's Observations on Custodial Interrogation
Additional Sessions Judge Harleen Kaur highlighted the necessity of custody, stating that "the possibility of the contractor trying to influence material witnesses or other persons associated with the case, or to tamper with the documentary or other evidence, cannot be ruled out at this stage." This decision underscores the court's concern over potential interference in the investigation.
The case originated from the tragic death of a young man in his 20s, with the prosecution alleging that the incident resulted from the accused contractor's failure to implement adequate safety measures at the excavation site. The court took this into account, noting the gravity of the situation.
Prosecution's Allegations and Contractor's Defense
According to the prosecution, Himanshu Gupta participated in the investigation on February 12, 14, and 17 but provided evasive responses and failed to submit relevant documents. It was further alleged that he maintained continuous contact with co-accused Rajesh Kumar Prajapati even after the incident, raising suspicions of collusion.
The state also raised questions about whether Gupta obtained the necessary permissions, as required under the Delhi Jal Board agreement, to dig the 15-foot deep pit. Additionally, doubts were expressed regarding how he executed the contract with the sub-contractor several months before it was formally awarded to him.
In defense, Gupta's counsel argued that the DJB approved the work only on October 9, 2025, by which time he had already been suspended as director due to corporate insolvency proceedings. This claim was presented to challenge the timeline of events.
Broader Implications and Other Developments
The court also rejected the regular bail plea of sub-contractor Rajesh Kumar Prajapati, reinforcing the strict stance on accountability in this case. So far, the investigation has led to:
- Two arrests made in connection with the incident.
- Three DJB officials suspended pending further inquiry.
- Prajapati and a laborer named Yogesh currently held in judicial custody.
This case highlights critical issues of safety compliance and regulatory oversight in construction projects, with the court's decision reflecting a commitment to thorough investigation and justice for the victim. The developments are closely watched as they unfold, potentially setting precedents for similar incidents in the future.
