NEW DELHI: Shankar Mishra, the person accused of urinating on an aged girl co-passenger on an Air India flight, advised a Delhi courtroom on Friday he didn’t commit the offensive act and it appears she herself urinated as she was affected by some illness.

The declare by his lawyer, made for the primary time because the sordid occasion unfolded on an Air India New York-New Delhi flight on November 26 final yr, flies within the face of denunciations of the accused by a number of the co-passengers and even a string of textual content message exchanges he had with the sufferer girl, which instructed the unsavoury incident certainly befell.

The counsel for the accused made the submission earlier than further classes decide Harjyot Singh Bhalla whereas arguing in opposition to a Delhi police petition searching for revision of an order handed by a Justice of the Peace courtroom denying police his custodial interrogation.

The decide disposed of the applying, saying the submissions made earlier than him didn’t appear to have been made in entrance of the metropolitan Justice of the Peace. He stated police can method the magisterial courtroom with its utility afresh.

“I’m not the accused. There must be someone else. It seems she herself urinated. She was suffering from some disease related to the prostate, which several “kathak dancers” appear to endure from. It was not him. The seating system was such that nobody may go to her seat

“Her seat may solely be approached from behind, and in any case, the urine couldn’t attain the seat’s entrance space. Also, the passenger

sitting behind the complainant didn’t make any such criticism,” the defence advocate advised the decide.

Senior advocate Ramesh Gupta, showing for Mishra, accused the police and the press of turning the case right into a joke.

“The first complaint was made by the complainant a day after the incident. What was the claim? To refund. That was done by the airline. The police and the press have turned this case into a joke… Was this case so big, was it a murder case that they reached Bangalore to arrest me and called me an absconder. He was removed from his job,” the defence counsel stated.

Arguing for recent custody of the accused, the prosecutor advised the courtroom that Mr Mishra’s interrogation was required to ascertain the sequence of occasions.

The decide, nevertheless, stated no matter submission he was making was not handled by the metropolitan Justice of the Peace. Even in any other case, if further info are raised, the applying might be moved earlier than the Justice of the Peace, the courtroom stated.

“With these, the application is disposed of. The department can approach metropolitan magistrate afresh with these grounds if it wishes so,” the decide stated.

Earlier in the course of the arguments, the decide requested the police if the complainant had given any assertion that there was a previous altercation or enmity with the accused. The prosecution replied within the damaging.

end-of