BMW hit-and-run accused can’t take benefit of non-communication of grounds of arrest, victim’s rights must be prioritised: HC

The bench on November 25 passed its verdict on habeas corpus pleas, the detailed judgement of which was made available on Wednesday.

In its order on November 18, the court had said that any breach would be the personal responsibility of the administrative head of the concerned civic body and warned of legal action against political parties violating the order.

The court emphasised on striking a balance between the right of the accused and victim and opined that “at some point of time, the right of the victim must also be prioritised.” (File Photo)

Rejecting pleas by Mihir Shah and his driver Rajrishi Bindawat, accused in the BMW hit-and-run case in which a 45-year-old woman was killed in Worli in Mumbai in July, the Bombay High Court said that when the presence of petitioners in the offending car was established, they cannot take the benefit that the grounds of arrest were not communicated to them.

The court emphasised on striking a balance between the right of the accused and victim and opined that “at some point of time, the right of the victim must also be prioritised.” A bench of Justices Bharati H Dangre and Manjusha A Deshpande observed, “This is a case where we feel that acting in utter derogation of respect to human life, the petitioners mowed down the wife of the complainant and in utter disregard to any humanitarian conduct, the vehicle was ruthlessly driven with her body being entangled between the bonnet and the wheels.”

It added that ‘having no regard to human life,’ the petitioners allegedly fled away from the spot and Mihir Shah went absconding and was required to be arrested after two days.

Story continues below this ad

The bench on November 25 passed its verdict on habeas corpus pleas, the detailed judgement of which was made available on Wednesday.

The petitioners had claimed that the arrest grounds were not given as per Section 50 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) and their fundamental rights of personal liberty among others were violated due to illegal detention.

During the hearing, the bench had said that it would ascertain that as the petitioners were caught “red-handed,” the communication of grounds of arrest in writing would become an empty formality.

In its judgment, the HC observed that both the petitioners “had committed the accident which was seen by the eyewitnesses and the fact that the FASTag was swiped by the person driving the BMW at the sea link toll was found to be in the name of Mihir Shah.”

Story continues below this ad

The bench considered the chain of circumstances being well within the knowledge of petitioners and the attempt of Mihir Shah to flee the course of justice apprehending arrest as he was aware about the charge he was bound to face.

“We are of the clear opinion that since the grounds of arrest in a situation like this, which are well within the knowledge of the offenders, they shall not be permitted to take advantage on the account that the ‘grounds of arrest’ are not communicated in writing,” it opined.

The bench further said that while the accused persons’ rights are weighed on parameters of life and liberty as per Article 21 of Constitution, the same shall equally apply to the victim.

Dismissing pleas lacking merit, the bench held, “We are of the firm view that the rights of the victim will also have to be tested on the same parameters of Article 21, which guarantees right to life and liberty and is equally applicable to the victim of the crime, before us.”

Stay updated with the latest - Click here to follow us on Instagram

Tags:
bmw
Mumbai