Shankar Mishra, the Air India passenger accused of urinating on a woman, told a Delhi court Wednesday that he was not running away from the fact that this was an obscene and revolting act, but the complainant's statement doesn't make a case of using criminal force to outrage her modesty. Mishra's lawyer Manu Sharma argued for bail before Metropolitan Magistrate Komal Garg at Patiala House Court, who reserved the order in the matter. Sharma told the court that IPC section 354 (assault or criminal force to woman with intent to outrage her modesty) was not made out in this case as there has to be driving intent behind Mishra's act to be considered while booking him under this section. "The unzipping is the problem more than urination. Of course it is revolting to go through something like this. But when someone unzips himself in a public place, there will be a driving intent for that. Here I am meeting a definite case," Sharma told the court. He argued that the age must also be considered in this case, pointing out that the complainant was 72 and the accused was 34 . "The case is that I am inebriated. The question is, was the unzipping to satisfy a sexual desire? That is not the case. I am not running away from the fact that it was obscene. Her statement doesn't make the case in four corners of putting me as a lustful man," Sharma told the court. "I don't undermine what she went through. This trial will take its course. This man, he was gainfully employed, he was sacked, he is already going through the repercussions," Sharma added. Additional Public Prosecutor Shruti Singhal opposed the bail application, stating that the accused was a wealthy and influential person who would hamper the investigation by contacting the complainant if released on bail. The prosecutor also said that a revision petition against the denial of police custody was filed in this matter. So far, seven witnesses have recorded their statements in this matter The complainant's lawyer Ankur Mahendro that there was no remorse shown by the accused in this case. "Intoxication can never be a defence; it is not that he was given liquor without his will. Assault does not require physical contact. Heinous act has been committed," Mahendro told the court. He went on to read a message purportedly sent by the father of the accused to the complainant, "karma will hit you back", to state that the woman was being intimidated by the accused. To this, Sharma said that the complainant's lawyer was indulging in mudslinging and claimed that the son-in-law of the complainant had sent a message to Air India threatening to reveal the case details to the media if her ticket was not refunded. Mishra's bail application stated that the Air India crew woke him up during the flight and informed him about the incident and suggested that he was the perpetrator. Mishra stated that she was shocked to hear about this particular suggestion and immediately protested. "However, the on-board crew communicated and interacted with him in a manner that effectively left him with no choice but to cooperate with them," the application read. Mishra then "sought to alleviate the situation and tendered unconditional apology", and also promised to compensate the woman. "Applicant vehemently maintained his innocence throughout the exchange with the Complainant. The Complainant also accepted this unconditional apology and expressed her unwillingness to subject the Applicant to any other trouble," the application read. Mishra then got the soiled belongings of the woman cleaned, laundered and delivered to the lady, the court was told. The accused claimed that he was surprised to receive a text message on December 19 from the complainant's daughter directing him not to communicate with them any further. "The timing of this change in position (is) particularly egregious because at this stage, the scene of the alleged event i.e.,the aircraft in question would have obviously been cleaned and therefore completely vitiated," the plea read. Mishra's bail plea moved by advocates Ishanee Sharma, Akshat Bajpai and Shobit Trehan stated that since the details of the events were leaked to the media, his client was "currently caught in a media storm and facing an effective media trial". The bail plea stated that the complainant is an educated and empowered woman who clearly in her exchanges with the Mishra sought to settle the matter willingly. "There is no question of the Applicant having any degree of influence upon her or any of the suggested witnesses," the plea stated. It also stated that an internal enquiry was constituted by Air India and Mishra had "willingly participated" in the inquiries, with the "intention to establish his innocence and will continue to act in this bona fide manner and assist the police in the investigation into this matter".
