‘Convicts escaped with ludicrously low penalty’

Bhopal: CBI has asked for an enhancement in the quantum of punishment for the convicts – with three of the eight still alive now – in the 1984 Bhopal gas tragedy. CBI counsel Tuesday told the court of principal district judge, Bhopal, that this is necessary given the enormity of the disaster that left thousands killed and maimed. The court was hearing the appeal against a trial court order that had sentenced the eight accused in the case, all of them being Indian officials of Union Carbide India Ltd (UCIL), to two years of rigorous imprisonment and fined them Rs 2 lakh each in 2010.
It was a suspended sentence and they were released on bail soon after the judgment so as to allow them to appeal in the higher court. Both CBI, the prosecuting agency, and the accused had filed appeals in the court of district judge, Bhopal, in 2011 with the former seeking enhancement of sentence and the latter exoneration from the charge. Final arguments of this case are being presented in the court by both the parties and NGOs working among gas victims, assisting the CBI in the case. The officials convicted in the case were UCIL chairman Keshub Mahindra, managing director Vijay Gokhale, vice-president Kishore Kamdar, works manager JN Mukund, production manager SP Choudhary, plant superintendent KV Shetty, assistant works manager RB Roychowdhury and production assistant Shakeel Qureshi. While RB Roychowdhury passed away during the trial itself, four more convicts died during pendency of appeal. Now only three of the convicts survive— SP Chaudhary, Kishore Kamdar and JN Mukund. The Union Carbide Corporation (UCC), its then chairman Warren Anderson and its subsidiary in Hong Kong UCC (eastern) were declared absconders by the trial court after they skipped the trial while UCC's Indian subsidiary Union Carbide India Ltd's (UCIL's) property was liquidated and eight of its officials were tried in court and held guilty. "However, the accused in the case, 'escaped' with ludicrously light punishment of 2 years of rigorous imprisonment and Rs 2 lakh fine each. The maximum punishment under Section 304 (a) and 338 of the IPC is two years of jail but the term of punishment could have been enhanced by awarding consecutive sentences under the two sections rather than concurrent sentences," Meena said. He submitted that the amount of fine could also have been far more as the trial court had powers to fine any amount to the accused as there is no limit on the amount of fine under the said sections and the accused come from a financially sound background. However, what attracted attention of defence lawyer Anirban Roy, who was also present during the hearing, was the contention of the CBI counsel that the accused could be given separate sentences for each casualty and injury so as to make the punishment commensurate with the gravity of the crime. "The last point raised by the CBI prosecutor is quite sensational. Going by his argument, the accused should remain in jail for 8,000 years if the number of deaths in the disaster is counted at 4,000," Roy told court.