Telangana High Court grants interim bail to Allu Arjun in Pushpa 2 stampede case

The Telangana High Court on Friday granted interim bail for four weeks to Telugu film actor Allu Arjun who was arrested after a stampede at the premiere of his film Pushpa 2 led to the death of a woman in Hyderabad on December 4..Single-judge Justice Juvvadi Sridevi observed that Arjun cannot prima facie be held responsible for the incident since he had simply gone to the movie premiere after taking seeking permission.The Court also rejected an argument by the State that Arjun had knowledge that such an untoward incident could happen if he went to the screening."Is he responsible for the tragedy that happened? What knowledge he is having? He has taken permission," the Court remarked.The Court asked whether a person can be made to spend time in jail even for a day merely because of him being an actor unless he is responsible for the incident."Whether a person is responsible for the incident - can he even undergo just for a day also, (just because) he is an actor," the Court asked.The Court said that ingredients of alleged offences were not prima facie made out. "Because he is an actor, he cannot be deprived of his right. As a citizen of this earth, he too has right to life and liberty," the Court added.It proceeded to grant interim bail to Arjun subject to the execution of a personal bond of ₹50,000.Arjun was also directed to cooperate with the investigation and refrain from interfering with the ongoing investigation or influencing witnesses..Is Allu Arjun responsible for the tragedy that happened?Telangana High Court.The Court was hearing a plea filed by Arjun to quash the First Information Report (FIR) against him at Chikkadpally police station for offences under Section 105 (punishment for culpable homicide not amounting to murder) and Section 118(1) read with Section 3(5) (voluntarily causing hurt or grievous hurt) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS).The case was registered based on a complaint filed by the family members of the deceased woman, M Revathi.Revathi tragically lost her life in a stampede that broke out at Sandhya theatre during the premiere of Pushpa 2 at around 9:30 PM. Her 9-year-old son is in critical condition and is undergoing treatment at KIMS Hospitals, Secunderabad.Arjun was present at the theatre during the stampede.The police have claimed that they were not informed in advance about Arjun's presence, which contributed to inadequate crowd control measures..Arjun was taken into custody by the Hyderabad Police Commissioner’s Task Force along with the Chikkadpally police from his residence at Jubilee Hills. The owner of Sandhya Theatre and two of its employees have also been arrested..When the matter was heard today, advocate Karam Komireddy, appearing for the theatre owners, said that the offences alleged were not made out since there was no intention on the part of the accused to commit any offence."Allegations do not attract the alleged offences. Essential ingredients of criminal intent, causing bodily injury etc. are not there in this case. When somebody dies of suffocation (in this manner), there is no question of intention. I didn't have intention or knowledge," it was argued.The counsel also refuted the prosecution's argument that the no proper facilities were provided and the police were not informed in advance about Allu Arjun attending the premiere. "Allegation made that is that there were no proper facilities. Prosecution's contention is that mob pushed the police. Allegation is that there was no prior information that Allu Arjun was coming. This is a false case. I have informed them on December 2," the counsel contended."Whether there is any acknowledgment?" the Bench asked."Police has acknowledged and stamped it," the counsel replied.."To say that we have not informed the police is false. Assistant commissioner of police has acknowledged it and signed it," Komireddy added. He maintained that the offence of culpable homicide cannot be invoked in this case."By any stretch of imagination, this is not culpable homicide. I am seeking for quashment," he said..The Public Prosecutor (PP) opposed the plea and said that Arjun went to the screening knowing fully well that an untoward incident may occur if he attends the event.However, the Court rejected that argument."What is this that he 'knows untoward incident'? He's a cinema actor, he took permission and he has gone," the judge said.The PP then said that Arjun was told not to attend the movie premiere. "Where is the written material informing the actor and actress to not visit the theatre," the Court demanded."Prior to the incident, SHO had informed them ... I will produce documents," the PP replied.The PP added that quashing orders cannot be passed now since accused have already been arrested."They are seeking regular bail. In respect of A11 (Allu Arjun), he is already remanded. Kindly take on Monday. Once arrested, bail should not be granted. Petition was by way of lunch motion. Please grant us breathing time to file documents," the State counsel argued..Senior Advocate Niranjan Reddy, appearing for Allu Arjun, contended that the FIR and remand report made it clear that Arjun cannot be prosecuted."The FIR, remand report did not say that there was any death going to happen (if Arjun went to attend the screening). The alleged offence is punishable maximum with five years in prison," Reddy said.He also cited a similar incident involving Bollywood actor Shah Rukh Khan who was booked for culpable homicide after a stampede occurred during promos for the movie Raes, when Khan had thrown t-shirts to a crowd.The Gujarat High Court granted relief to Khan and this order was upheld by the Supreme Court as well, it was pointed out.In that case too, Khan had taken permission to hold promo event within the premises of Indian Railways where stampede took place. "Allu Arjun was on balcony, while the stampede took place on a ground below where the deceased woman was," Reddy went on to argue.He added that while Khan was throwing t-shirts, no such overt action took place in the present case case."I (Allu Arjun) was on the first floor of the theater. The lady who dies is on the ground floor. The surge happened in the lower area due to which the woman and child fell unconscious. Here Allu Arjun has not been doing anything proactively - if you compare it with Sharukh Khan's case where he was proactively throwing smiley balls and t-shirts stirring the crowd," Reddy submitted.He said that such tragedies are very common during political rallies as well."For the police to say that this is culpable homicide, is unacceptable," Reddy said..Reddy maintained that he was not seeking a Habeas Corpus writ since custody of Arjun by police was no longer illegal after the trial court passed a remand order earlier today.Instead, he said that he was seeking interim bail."I am not asking for Habeas Corpus. I am seeking interim bail in this quash petition," he said.Reddy also said that the police know well that Arjun will cooperate with the probe and will not run away. Yet they arrested him for sensationalising the issue, the senior counsel contended."It is not their fear that I (Allu Arjun) will go away. This (arrest) is just for sensationalism. The remand report doesn't say anything about intention or knowledge of possible death. This (arrest) is travesty of my liberty. Your Ladyship may grant interim bail," Reddy said..The PP, however, maintained that no permission was granted for Arjun to attend the event."I will place the material. They have just filed a request before the officers, no officer has given them permission," the State counsel said.The PP added that Allu Arjun and others accused had the knowledge that there would be a large crowd at the screening.Reddy, meanwhile, countered that there were not enough police personnel to control the crowd even though they were informed in advance about Arjun attending the event."Police were intimated and they were not in adequate in number. Insufficient police was there so they couldn't control the crowd. The police came from first floor to lower floor when they heard commotion below," he said..The PP continued to argue that no interim relief could be granted in a quashing petition, especially in a case where a person has died and a child is in hospital"Kindly hear the 482 matter (petition to quash case) on another date. A life has gone. A young lady has died. Complainant's son is still in ventilator ... It is not a fit case to grant any interim relief," the PP said..The Court, however, eventually granted interim bail to Arjun..[Read Order].[Read Live Coverage]