Kerala High Court halts arrest of MACT judge booked after his minor son causes fatal car crash

The Kerala High Court on Thursday granted interim protection from arrest to the Additional District Judge whose his son was recently involved in a car crash that killed a scooter rider.

Justice Kauser Edappagath passed the order on an anticipatory bail plea moved by the judge.

"The police shall not arrest the applicant until further orders. However, he shall appear before the investigating officer today at 1:00 pm and if necessary as and when called for. The interrogation of the applicant shall be done in accordance with the guidelines laid down by the Supreme Court," the Court ordered.

Senior Counsel P Vijaya Bhanu, appearing for the accused- judge, told the Court that he appeared before the police yesterday and was interrogated for over 4 hours.

Another notice to appear before the police has since been issued, Bhanu added.

The bench questioned the necessity of custodial interrogation and further said that since the accused is a judge himself, he will cooperate with the probe.

"What was the need to interrogate him for 4 hours and now for further interrogation? Why is his arrest required? He is a judicial officer. He will co-operate with the investigation," the Court remarked.

The counsel representing the legal heirs of the victim of the crash opposed the plea.

He submitted that the accused judge tampered with evidence once he was informed of the accident.

However, the Court said that it has to go strictly as per law and granted protection from arrest to the accused.

The Court also asked the prosecutor to furnish the State's response/ instructions on the plea.

The accused-judge's 17-year-old son was driving a Mercedes-Benz car when he hit a two-wheeler in Kochi's Cheranalloor on October 25, killing the scooter rider, one Jayabalakrishnan.

The judge who is posted at a Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT) at Iranjalakuda in Thrissur district, was arraigned as an accused in the FIR registered by the Police after the crash.

The FIR includes offences punishable under Section 105 (culpable homicide not amounting to murder) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS) read with Sections 181, 183, 199A(1), and 199A(2) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (MVA).

Section 199A provides that when a minor commits a motor vehicle offence, the guardian or vehicle owner is presumed to be responsible and can be prosecuted and punished, subject to statutory exceptions.

In his plea before the Kerala High Court seeking anticipatory bail, the judge claimed that he had no knowledge whatsoever that the vehicle had been removed from the premises. He learnt of it only when he was awakened by a telephone call informing him that his minor son had taken the vehicle out when he was asleep and gotten into the accident.

He also pointed out that Section 105 BNS requires explicit mens rea, that is, the knowledge that the act is likely to cause death.

"Attributing knowledge under Section 105 BNS vicariously to a parent who was sleeping at home when a minor took a vehicle surreptitiously is legally untenable and fundamentally opposed to settled principles of criminal law", the plea stated.

The accused-judge was represented by Senior Advocate P Vijaya Bhanu and advocate John S Ralph.

The judge's son granted bail by the Juvenile Justice Board in Ernakulam on October 26. The State's plea seeking cancellation of the bail is pending before a sessions court.

Meanwhile, the family of the man who died in the crash submitted a complaint before the Kerala High Court Chief Justice seeking an enquiry into the judicial officer's conduct.

Sources told Bar & Bench that the High Court's Administrative Committee held a preliminary meeting on October 27 to examine the material concerning the accident. Since the police investigation is still underway, the committee decided not to take any action against the judicial officer at present and await further material from the investigation agency.

Editor’s note: Bar & Bench has chosen not to disclose the accused-judge’s name as the Juvenile Justice Act prohibits disclosure of any details that may lead to the identification of a child in conflict with law.