Kochi Mini Cooper crash: Defence challenges culpable homicide charge, prosecution cites alcohol test to oppose bail

Kochi: Was the fatal Mini Cooper car crash in Kochi's Nedumbassery a case of culpable homicide or rash and negligent driving?

The question figured prominently in the bail hearing of the four accused on Friday, with the defence challenging the charge of culpable homicide and the prosecution opposing their release, citing the prime accused Suhail Sajeev’s high blood alcohol level and CCTV footage of reckless driving after leaving bars. The Judicial First Class Magistrate Court in Angamaly reserved its verdict for Saturday.

The court heard the bail applications of Suhail Sajeev, who was driving the speeding Mini Cooper, and co-passengers Ninav, Joel and Ameer. The three passengers were arrested for allegedly abetting the crime by allowing Suhail to drive despite knowing he was drunk.

Arguing for the accused, Advocate Saiby Jose Kidangoor challenged the invocation of Section 105 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (culpable homicide not amounting to murder), describing the case as an outcome of “media hype” and public sensationalism.

The defence contended that the essential legal ingredient of ‘knowledge’ that driving would result in certain fatal consequences was absent in the case. It argued that the case, at most, warranted charges under Section 281/291 (rash and negligent driving).

The lawyer also questioned the abetment charges against the co-accused, arguing that they were merely passengers. Pointing to alleged discrepancies in the police version, the defence noted that Section 105 had been invoked in the initial FIR even before the suspects were formally identified or medical tests confirmed drunkenness.

It further argued that the complainant Priyadh, based on whose statements the FIR was registered, had not witnessed the collision but had only stated that the car swerved past him.

The hearing saw a sharp exchange when the defence argued that the victims had violated traffic rules by riding three on a single scooter and travelling in the middle lane.

The magistrate questioned, “Does that mean it can be hit?”
When the defence lawyer maintained that triple-riding had contributed to the accident, the court asked, “Haven’t all three died? Action cannot be taken now, right?”

Outside the courtroom, the accused’s lawyers questioned the credibility of the alcohol test results and alleged an orchestrated campaign targeting the accused's families, including cyber-attacks and threats to their businesses.

Prosecution cites alcohol levels, CCTV footage
The prosecution and counsel representing the victims strongly opposed bail, maintaining that the incident was far from an ordinary road accident.

Medical reports showed that Suhail’s blood alcohol content was 159 mg per 100 ml, which is 5.3 times the permissible statutory limit of 30 mg/100 ml.

The prosecution also presented CCTV footage showing the four youths entering and exiting bars. It cited the excessive speed of the car and argued that the co-accused had actively enabled the crime.

Emphasising that the investigation remained at an initial and critical stage, the prosecution warned that granting bail would send a wrong message to society.

The fatal crash occurred around 1.45 am on October 11, when the speeding Mini Cooper rammed the rear of a scooter near Nedumbassery. The impact instantly killed Devika, Gopika and Iyas.

The court is expected to pronounce its verdict on the four bail applications on Thursday

High Court directs action on bars
In a related development, the Kerala High Court on Friday directed the Excise Commissioner to decide within seven days on show-cause notices issued to three bars for serving liquor to persons below the legal drinking age of 23. The excise has earlier suspended their liquor licenses.

The HC was considering a petition filed by the bar hotels challenging this.