Mumbai, June 30, 2022 – The Additional Sessions Judge Smt. C.V. Patil granted bail to Mukesh Pradeep Singh, a 26-year-old driver, in a case involving fatal drunk driving. The court, while acknowledging the seriousness of the charges, imposed stringent conditions on Singh’s release.

Singh was arrested in connection with Crime No. 179/2022, registered at Cuffe Parade Police Station, for offenses under Section 304(ii) (culpable homicide not amounting to murder), 337 (causing hurt by act endangering life or personal safety of others), and 338 (causing grievous hurt by act endangering¹ life or personal safety of others) of the Indian Penal² Code (IPC), as well as Sections 185 (driving by a drunken person or under the influence of drugs) and 134(a)(b) (duty of driver in case of accident and injury to a person) of the Motor Vehicle Act.

The prosecution alleged that Singh, while driving under the influence of alcohol, caused a series of accidents, resulting in one death and grievous injuries to three others. The alcohol examination report revealed that Singh’s blood contained 0.192 percent ethyl alcohol. The prosecution also presented a report from the Regional Transport Office (RTO) indicating that the accidents were not due to mechanical defects in the vehicle.

Singh, through his advocate Mr. Mukesh Mishra, filed a bail application under Section 439 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC), arguing that the incident occurred due to negligence and not with intention, suggesting that Section 304A (causing death by negligence), a bailable offense, should apply instead of Section 304(ii).

The prosecution, represented by Additional Public Prosecutor (APP) Mr. Shankar Erande, strongly opposed the bail, citing the seriousness of the offenses and the ongoing investigation.

Judge Patil, after reviewing the evidence and arguments, noted that Singh had allegedly caused multiple accidents while intoxicated, which indicated a pattern of reckless behavior beyond simple negligence.

“From the report and story of the prosecution, it has come on record that accused has driven car by consuming liquor. The series of incident shows that accused had dashed to 5 places out of which and in same incident one is died and three have sustained grievous injuries. Though, there is argument from the side of accused that Section 304(ii) is not applicable and the said act is simplicitor happened in negligence, it covers under Section 304A of the IPC and which is bailable one. Here 304(ii) is an offence with intention and 304A attracts only death by negligence. From the report of IO it appears that he has also got inspected the subject vehicle used by accused at the time of offence and the concerned officer from the RTO reported that said incidence/accident not occurred due to mechanical defect in the vehicle. The report is also supporting to the prosecution story to show that Section 304(ii) attracts here. As per statement of the accused if the act had happened with negligence then there would have been a single dash but after one by one the accused has dashed to 4 to 5 places out of which one person is died and three have sustained grievous injuries. The nature of offence committed by accused cannot be said that it is act done by negligence. Therefore, prima facie there is no question of applying only Section 304A which is bailable one,” Judge Patil stated in her order.

The court acknowledged the prosecution’s concerns about potential tampering with evidence and the risk of Singh absconding, but also noted that the investigation was nearing completion and the vehicle had been seized.

“Investigation officer and prosecution have strong objection to release the accused on bail. From the report it appears that from the date of offence that is 12/4/2022 the accused is in custody. The report further disclosed that investigation is in progress and therefore, if accused released on bail he will tamper prosecution evidence. The report disclosed that statement of almost all witnesses have been recorded. Spot panchanama, Vehicle inspection panchanama are already conducted. The report itself disclosed that investigation is at the stage of completion but till now chargesheet is not filed. Investigation Officer has also seized Car used by accused, therefore, grounds of objection that if accused released on bail then he will tamper evidence and he may abscond can be secured by imposing necessary stringent conditions on accused. Certainly from the report of the IO nature of offence is serious one and therefore, stringent conditions needs to be imposed on accused,” Judge Patil observed.

Consequently, the court granted Singh bail, ordering him to execute a personal bond of Rs. 1,00,000 with one or more solvent sureties of the same amount. The court also imposed several stringent conditions, including:

• Not leaving India without prior permission of the trial court.
• Providing ID proof, Aadhaar Card, residence proof, and phone number to the Investigating Officer.
• Cooperating with the investigation and attending the police station every Tuesday between 11:00 AM and 1:00 PM.
• Not tampering with prosecution evidence.

The order, dictated on June 29, 2022, and signed on June 30, 2022, was uploaded at 5:00 PM on June 30, 2022, as certified by stenographer Mrs. Jyoti Mane.

This ruling highlights the judiciary’s approach in balancing the seriousness of offenses with the rights of the accused, particularly in cases involving drunk driving. It also underscores the court’s commitment to imposing stringent conditions to ensure compliance and prevent potential tampering with evidence.