<p>A sessions court in <a href="https://www.deccanherald.com/tag/morbi" target="_blank">Morbi</a> rejected the regular bail application moved by clock-making firm Oreva Group's managing director Jaysukh Patel, who is behind bars in the suspension bridge collapse case. Patel had moved the court after police filed a chargesheet against him.</p>.<p>District sessions Judge P C Joshi pronounced the order on Saturday refusing to grant relief to Patel. In his bail plea, Patel had claimed that the case against him, based on the investigation, would at most fall under the provision of section 304A (causing death by negligence) and not under sections 304 (culpable homicide not amounting to murder) and 308 (attempt to commit culpable homicide) under the Indian Penal Code.</p>.<p>Patel moved his bail application through lawyers Rohit Verma and Rituraj Nanavati after filing of the chargesheet which alleged that Patel was the main suspect behind the suspension bridge collapse that killed 135 people on October 30, 2022.</p>.<p><strong>Also Read | <a href="https://www.deccanherald.com/national/west/24-detained-for-violence-during-ram-navami-in-gujarat-1205266.html" target="_blank">24 detained for violence during Ram Navami in Gujarat</a></strong></p>.<p>While seeking bail, Patel refuted all charges against him and said that authorities had never complained against him for maintaining the bridge since 2008. He claimed that he undertook the responsibility of maintaining the historic bridge only as a "public-spirited citizen". Responding to the charges that he didn't involve experts in the repair work, Patel said that repair and renovation work was carried out by the same persons who carried out the repair work back in 2008, but authorities never raised any objection.</p>.<p>Patel is alleged to have hired a Surendranagar-based firm, Dev Prakash Solutions, for repair work, even though didn't have any expertise in the area. Two of its owners - Prakash Parmar and his son Devang - are also co-accused. "At no point of time did the authorities raise any concern with respect to the task of renovation undertaken," Patel claimed in his bail plea. </p>.<p>Responding to charges that he didn't arrange for safety equipment, manage the public at the bridge and increase ticket prices, Patel said that nowhere in the MoU with Morbi municipality were these conditions mentioned. Rebutting charges that he didn't inform authorities before reopening the bridge, Patel said that it was an open secret since advertisements were put up across the town in public glare.</p>
<p>A sessions court in <a href="https://www.deccanherald.com/tag/morbi" target="_blank">Morbi</a> rejected the regular bail application moved by clock-making firm Oreva Group's managing director Jaysukh Patel, who is behind bars in the suspension bridge collapse case. Patel had moved the court after police filed a chargesheet against him.</p>.<p>District sessions Judge P C Joshi pronounced the order on Saturday refusing to grant relief to Patel. In his bail plea, Patel had claimed that the case against him, based on the investigation, would at most fall under the provision of section 304A (causing death by negligence) and not under sections 304 (culpable homicide not amounting to murder) and 308 (attempt to commit culpable homicide) under the Indian Penal Code.</p>.<p>Patel moved his bail application through lawyers Rohit Verma and Rituraj Nanavati after filing of the chargesheet which alleged that Patel was the main suspect behind the suspension bridge collapse that killed 135 people on October 30, 2022.</p>.<p><strong>Also Read | <a href="https://www.deccanherald.com/national/west/24-detained-for-violence-during-ram-navami-in-gujarat-1205266.html" target="_blank">24 detained for violence during Ram Navami in Gujarat</a></strong></p>.<p>While seeking bail, Patel refuted all charges against him and said that authorities had never complained against him for maintaining the bridge since 2008. He claimed that he undertook the responsibility of maintaining the historic bridge only as a "public-spirited citizen". Responding to the charges that he didn't involve experts in the repair work, Patel said that repair and renovation work was carried out by the same persons who carried out the repair work back in 2008, but authorities never raised any objection.</p>.<p>Patel is alleged to have hired a Surendranagar-based firm, Dev Prakash Solutions, for repair work, even though didn't have any expertise in the area. Two of its owners - Prakash Parmar and his son Devang - are also co-accused. "At no point of time did the authorities raise any concern with respect to the task of renovation undertaken," Patel claimed in his bail plea. </p>.<p>Responding to charges that he didn't arrange for safety equipment, manage the public at the bridge and increase ticket prices, Patel said that nowhere in the MoU with Morbi municipality were these conditions mentioned. Rebutting charges that he didn't inform authorities before reopening the bridge, Patel said that it was an open secret since advertisements were put up across the town in public glare.</p>