Bail has been refused to all four accused in the Mini Cooper Crash Case, in which three persons on a scooter died near Kochi airport. The allegations are untested and the accused are presumed innocent.
Kochi: Four accused in the Nedumbassery Mini Cooper crash case, among them 19-year-old Suhail Sajeev, who is alleged to have been driving the car, have had their regular bail applications rejected by the Second Additional District and Sessions Court, Ernakulam, on Wednesday. A detailed order was awaited at the time of writing [Suhail v. State of Kerala and Another].
Second Additional District and Sessions Judge S.R. Syamlal decided the pleas. The other accused are Ninav, Joyal S. Anto and Ameen Shah. Sajeev and Ninav were arrested on October 11 and Anto and Shah the next day, and all four were remanded to judicial custody. The Court has expressed no view on the merits, the allegations are untested, and every accused is presumed innocent until proved guilty.
The Magistrate’s refusal on October 17
The accused first went to the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Angamaly, which refused bail on October 17. Magistrate Samyuktha M.K. held that driving at high speed while intoxicated could prima facie support an inference of knowledge that death was likely, and said the combination of speed and intoxication:
“cannot, at this stage, be brushed aside as mere ignorance or inadvertence.”
On the three passengers, the Magistrate observed that they were aware of the driver’s intoxication and that the chances of their encouraging high-speed driving could not be ruled out, with the precise nature of their participation to be determined on the evidence. Whether the Sessions Court has adopted the same reasoning will be known when its detailed order is available.
The night of October 11
In the early hours of October 11, on the Athani-Airport Road in Nedumbassery, the Mini Cooper allegedly driven by Sajeev struck a scooter carrying three youngsters, all of whom died. The prosecution alleges offences under Sections 281, 105, 49 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, which cover rash driving, culpable homicide not amounting to murder, abetment and acts done by several persons in furtherance of a common intention.
Before the Magistrate, the prosecution alleged that the driver’s blood alcohol concentration was 161 mg per 100 ml and his urine alcohol concentration 230 mg per 100 ml, against a permissible limit of 30 mg per 100 ml under Section 185 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, and that the car was travelling above 100 km/h on a stretch with a limit of 60 to 70 km/h. It also alleged that CCTV footage showed the accused visiting several bars before the crash and that the co-accused encouraged the driver to drive despite knowing he was drunk.
What the defence argued
Even if proved, the defence said, the case would at most amount to death by negligence under Section 106 BNS and not culpable homicide. It argued that the first information statement did not allege excessive speed, and that the position of the scooter on the road and the riders’ lack of helmets needed consideration. The three passengers denied any role in the driving.
ALSO READ: Kochi Mercedes Crash: Judge Booked Under Section 199A MV Act For Minor Son’s Driving
The Magistrate held that these questions involve weighing evidence and could not be decided at the bail stage, and referred to the Supreme Court’s decision in State v. Sanjeev Nanda on the line between negligence and culpable homicide in drunk or high-speed driving.
Case Title: Suhail v. State of Kerala and Another [BA No. 2398 of 2026 and connected cases]
Bench: Sri S.R. Syamlal, Second Additional District and Sessions Judge, Ernakulam
Date of Order: October 28, 2026
Appearances: Advocates Saiby Jose Kidangoor, Sreeraj S. Rajaram, Afsana Khan and others for the accused