The Kerala High Court has granted anticipatory bail to a serving District and Sessions Judge in a case arising from a fatal road accident involving a car allegedly driven by his minor son. The accident, which occurred in Ernakulam district, claimed the life of a 55-year-old scooter rider. The Court considered whether the judicial officer's custodial interrogation was necessary, particularly when he had already appeared before the investigating officer and the investigation had progressed substantially.
Background
According to the prosecution, the incident occurred on October 25, 2026, at around 2:20 AM on Vallarpadam-Container Road. A Mercedes-Benz car allegedly driven by a minor without a valid driving licence collided with a scooter travelling in the same direction near the Kairali Ford Car Showroom at Marapprambu, Cheranalloor.
The collision resulted in the death of Jayabalakrishnan, aged 55, who was riding the scooter.
The car belonged to the applicant, who was subsequently included as the second accused in the case. The allegations were registered under Section 105 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, read with Sections 181, 183, 199A(1) and 199A(2) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.
The applicant's counsel argued that he had no knowledge that his minor son had taken the vehicle from the house while he was asleep. It was submitted that he came to know about the accident only after receiving a telephone call from his son.
Opposing the bail application, the prosecution and counsel representing the deceased's family argued that the minor had driven the vehicle with the applicant's knowledge and consent. They also maintained that custodial interrogation was necessary to establish his alleged involvement.
On the other hand, the applicant's counsel argued that Section 105 of the BNS required the necessary knowledge or intention, which could not automatically be attributed to a parent merely because the vehicle was registered in his name.
After examining the case diary and the objections filed by the State, the Court noted that the applicant had already appeared before the investigating officer twice and undergone interrogation.
The Court recorded that the applicant was interrogated for four hours on October 28, 2026, and for another two hours on the following day.
It also took note of the seizure of the applicant's laptop, mobile phones and other articles, along with the vehicle involved in the accident. The seized electronic devices had already been sent for chemical analysis.
The Court observed:
"The records and the statement of objection submitted by the State would show that a search was conducted at the house of the applicant and his laptop, mobile phones and other articles were already seized. The offending vehicle has also been seized by the police. The electronic gadgets seized from the applicant's house were sent for chemical analysis."
The Court further noted that the investigation had reached an advanced stage and considered the applicant's position as a serving judicial officer, his absence of criminal antecedents and his willingness to cooperate.
While considering the necessity of further custody, Justice Kauser Edappagath observed:
"Considering the allegations made against the applicant, his custodial interrogation seems unnecessary. For these reasons, I find this to be an appropriate case to grant pre-arrest bail to the applicant."
Allowing the bail application, the Kerala High Court directed that the applicant be released on bail in the event of arrest upon executing a bond of Rs. 1 lakh with two solvent sureties for the same amount.
The Court further directed him to cooperate with the investigation, appear before the investigating officer whenever required, refrain from committing similar offences and avoid contacting prosecution witnesses or interfering with the evidence.
