The Supreme Court granted interim bail to a man accused in a fatal accident after his father pledged Rs 1 crore to support the orphaned children. The Court ensured that the compensation would be for the children’s welfare, regardless of the case’s outcome.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court gave interim bail to a man accused in a serious road accident case. This decision came after the accused’s father promised to give Rs 1 crore as help to the children who lost both their parents in the accident.
A bench of Justice JK Maheshwari and Justice Aravind Kumar noted that since the father of the accused was taking steps to support the orphaned children and showing responsibility for their future, the Court found it fair to grant bail for some time.
“After hearing and considering the peculiar facts of the case and taking note of the endeavour of the father of the petitioner for taking steps towards restorative justice, by which he has shown his concern to maintain the minor children after the demise of their parents on account of the road traffic accident caused by his son, we deem it appropriate to grant interim bail to the petitioner for a period of three months subject to compliance of the terms of the affidavit as referred to hereinabove,”
-the Court said.
The case involved a plea against a Bombay High Court order that had earlier denied bail to the accused, Jay Chandrahas Gharat.
He was charged under various sections of the Indian Penal Code such as Section 201 (hiding evidence), Section 279 (rash driving), Section 304 (causing death by negligence), Section 304(2) (culpable homicide with knowledge but without intent), Section 338 (causing serious injury by reckless act), Section 353 (assaulting a public servant), and Section 504 (intentionally provoking someone to disturb peace).
Apart from these, he was also booked under Section 134(A) (driver’s duty to give medical aid), Section 134(B) (driver’s duty to inform the police), and Section 184 (dangerous driving) of the Motor Vehicles Act.
The accident happened in April 2024 when the accused, driving a Hyundai Creta, crashed into a scooter carrying a couple and their daughter. Sadly, the couple died on the spot, while their daughter suffered severe injuries.
During the hearing, the accused’s father assured the Court that he was personally taking care of the medical treatment and future of the orphaned children. He promised to deposit Rs 50 lakh immediately in a fixed deposit in a government bank and to give another Rs 50 lakh in two more payments.
To ensure the children’s safety and well-being, the Supreme Court spoke to their uncle and checked their living conditions, education, and overall care. It was confirmed that the children were living with their uncle and studying at Saint Mary’s Convent High School, Uran. Their uncle was already paying Rs 25,000 per child every year for their school fees and other daily needs.
Understanding this situation, the accused’s father also agreed to give Rs 25,000 per month for six months to support the children’s education and other expenses.
To keep track of their well-being, the Court asked the police and the District Legal Services Authority (DLSA) to regularly check on the children and submit monthly reports regarding their education, health, and overall condition. These reports must be submitted to the court registry.
The Supreme Court also made it very clear that no matter what happens in the criminal case, the Rs 1 crore given by the accused’s father will remain for the benefit of the children.
“We make it clear that as stated before us, the amount offered and deposited by the father of the petitioner is an amount of compensation for the welfare of the children, notwithstanding the outcome of the criminal case or in other proceeding/s,”
-the Court said.
The next hearing of the case is scheduled for May 23.
The accused was represented by Senior Advocate Gaurav Agrawal, along with advocates Susmit Phatale, Sudhanshu Kaushesh, and Pulkit Agarwal.
On the other side, Advocates Samrat Krishnarao Shinde and Aaditya Aniruddha Pande appeared for the respondent.
CASE TITLE:
Jay Chandrahas Gharat v. The State of Maharashtra.
Would You Like Assistance In Drafting A Legal Notice Or Complaint?
CLICK HERE
Click Here to Read Our Reports on CJI Sanjeev Khanna
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES
