Arunkumar Devnath Singh v. State of Maharashtra
SLP (Crl) No. 15128/2024
05 November 2024
Case
May 19, 2024: Kalyani Nagar, Pune, Accident of Tragic Proportions – a Porsche car driven
by a minor, reportedly Child in Conflict with Law (CCL) – runs over two young people dead.
Anticipatory Bail Appeal of Arunkumar Devnath Singh, father of one of the co-accused
arrested in the case.
Supreme Court Case
The appeal by the petitioner was rejected by the Supreme Court, whose bench consisted of
Justices Sudhanshu Dhulia and Ahsanuddin Amanullah. The order was passed upholding that
of the Bombay High Court on October 23, which had rejected his plea on October 23.
According to the argument of the court, the charges against Singh call for serious
consideration because of the import of the charges.
Arguments Advanced
Senior Advocate Vibha Datta Makhija argued on behalf of Singh. Makhija argued that
“prejudice” is being caused to him because of the voluminous media coverage.
Justice Dhulia admitted this but explained that the court does not entertain outside biases
when making its judgments.
- Explanation on Connection: Justice Dhulia asked Singh if he had any connection
with the driver. Makhija clarified that Singh was the father of a friend who just
happened to be in the car at the time of the incident.
- Legal Issues: According to Senior Advocate Siddharth Luthra, the High Court found
no prima facie case for bail under Sections 464 and Section 467 of the IPC related to
forgery and cheating.
Conspiracy and Cheating Charges
High Court observed grave allegations against Singh that after the accident, he had tried to
tamper with the evidence:
- Bribery Allegation: Singh allegedly bribed doctors at Sassoon Hospital to swap the
blood sample of his son with another accused, Ashish Mittal, so that his evidence of
alcohol consumption would be negated. - Conspiracy: The court held this was a conspiracy under Section 120-B of the IPC
since it involved more than two people who were colluding to create false evidence.
Justice Manish Pitale remarked that Singh and other accused had done acts to make the
investigators believe that they had nothing to do with the accident.
Legal Provisions against Intoxicated Driving
Provisions related to driving under intoxication in India are very harsh:
Applying Laws: According to Section 185 of the Motor Vehicles Act, driving under
intoxication invites punishment in the form of fines and imprisonment. If the same acts lead
to accidents causing hurt or death, then the punishment becomes severe.
Consequences for the Offenders: In case of death due to drunken driving, the offenders can
be charged under the IPC sections for culpable homicide not amounting to murder (Section
304) or causing death by negligence (Section 304A).
Conclusion
While granting anticipatory bail to Arunkumar Devnath Singh, the Supreme Court reminded
everyone that the seriousness of the charges leveled against him, along with probably
conspiring to defeat justice, must be dealt with suitably. The case brings into perspective the
legal ramifications attached to drunken driving and fudging evidence. All the parties
concerned will have to strictly abide by the canons of law in the subsequent proceedings
before the court and deliver justice to the bereaved families.
