BMW accident: Delhi court bail to accused, says allegation of culpable homicide on weak footing

New Delhi, Sep 27 (PTI) A court here on Saturday granted bail to Gaganpreet Kaur, the key accused in the BMW incident, saying the accident's CCTV footage showed the allegation of culpable homicide was on a "fragile foundation." Rapping an ambulance driver and a paramedic who arrived at the spot within seconds for not showing "humanity" and failing in their professional duty, the court said the primary golden-hour lapse on the footage was because of them, who, despite being first on scene, rendered no aid.

The court also expressed astonishment that a DTC bus, which came in contact with the motorcycle, continued to drive without caring for the impact caused by the accident.

Kaur, 38, is accused of being behind the wheel of the BMW car that rammed into a two-wheeler being ridden by Navjot Singh, a senior finance ministry official, and his wife.

The 52-year-old government employee died, while his wife was grievously injured in the incident.

Judicial Magistrate Ankit Garg said, "Considering the CCTV-established sequence of loss of control, divider impact, flip, and contact; the ambulance's immediate arrival and abrupt departure without assistance, undermining the attribution of golden-hour loss to the accused; the documentary nature of the remaining investigation; and the absence of antecedents and availability of enforceable conditions to obviate tampering, I find that the applicant has made out a case for bail at this stage." The court underlined the judicial precedents: presumption of innocence, and bail being the norm, and jail the exception.

"Tested on these touchstones, the present case, particularly in light of the CCTV record, tilts in favour of bail with safeguards," it said.

The court said, according to the footage, the car lost control, struck the divider, flipped, and, while flipping, came into contact with the motorcyclist. The people on the motorcycle then hit a bus, and the pillion rider fell in front of the BMW car while the driver of the motorcycle was crushed beneath it.

"Very astonishingly, the DTC bus, in whose contact the motorcycle comes, does not even stop. It slows down for a while and then carries on, without caring for the impact caused by the accident," it said.

The court said the footage did not support a straightforward, deliberate high-speed ramming of the motorcycle from behind version, but a loss of control culminating in a flip that led to the tragic contact with the car and the bus.

Underlining that the Delhi Police invoked various Section 105 (culpable homicide not amounting to murder) in the case, the court said that the footage brought the occurrence closer to rash or negligent driving than to culpable homicide premised on the mode of collision.

It said that the FIR stated the BMW car struck the motorcycle from behind in a direct collision, but the footage did not corroborate it.

"Whether a higher mental element can ultimately be proved is a matter for trial; at the bail stage, the reduced strength of that allegation must be duly weighed," it said.

"An official ambulance, empty and immediately behind the vehicles involved, is seen (in the footage) arriving within two seconds. The ambulance, after watching the incident, stops at some distance, and the driver and paramedic rush towards the scene, but without offering any help or assistance, come back in a relaxed manner within 40 seconds," it said.

The court said the footage revealed that when the paramedic and driver approached, the motorcyclist was unconscious beneath the car, but they did not check the pulse or administer first aid, and departed within roughly 40 seconds, manoeuvring their vehicle out. They were the first to leave the scene, it said.

"The explanation, in his statement, attributed by the paramedic, that help was offered but no one responded, appears incongruent with the footage because an unconscious victim cannot respond, and the accused is, as per the statement of the paramedic, occupied in extracting her children from the overturned car," the court said.

"The accident happened in front of the eyes of the paramedic, but he still chose not to act, only because an unconscious person did not ask for help," it added.

The court thus denounced the driver's and paramedics' "highly unprofessional and unethical" conduct.

Expressing exasperation, the court said that the ambulance, which "miraculously" appeared within two seconds of the accident, was empty, did not have any other assignment and was going towards Base Hospital, yet it failed to intervene and fled from the spot quickly.

"The victim, due to ignorance of duty by the paramedics (ambulance driver and the paramedic), was taken almost seven minutes after the accident towards the hospital.

"Lives could have been saved, aid could have been provided swiftly, only if they had shown some humanity and just done their duty. Therefore, their failure to provide aid/assistance shall also be looked at through the lens of professional misconduct," the court added.

It also rejected the prosecution's argument that the victim could have survived if timely medical aid had been provided by the accused.

"The paramedics' statements only describe the victim as unconscious, without recording any clinical examination of pulse or respiration. Similarly, the complainant (victim's wife) and witness, Gulfam (van driver), do not clarify whether the victim showed signs of life while being taken to the hospital, the victim is declared brought dead at the hospital, and despite a specific query by the court, the post-mortem report has not yet been filed," the court said.

On the allegation that the injured was taken to a faraway hospital, the court said whether Kaur was trying to help the victim or create evidence in her favour was a question for investigation and trial.

"But, the CCTV footage, the conduct of the DTC bus driver and crucially, the conduct of paramedics, erodes the principal factual plank for BNS Section 105 (death due to delayed proper care), especially when the post-mortem report is awaited," the court said.

It said the prosecution had no requirement for the accused's police custody, as no such application had been made till now.

The court said, "With the CCTV weakening the prosecution's theory of culpable homicide anchored in delayed care, and revealing intervening paramedic dereliction, continued incarceration would be disproportionate at this stage." The court granted Kaur the relief, subject to furnishing a personal bond of Rs 1 lakh along with two sureties of the same amount. It also asked Kaur to surrender her passport and not contact any material witnesses.

Navjot Singh succumbed to his injuries, which he sustained on Ring Road near the Delhi Cantonment Metro station on September 14.

He was a deputy secretary in the Department of Economic Affairs and lived in West Delhi's Hari Nagar.

Navajot Singh and his wife were returning home after visiting the Bangla Sahib Gurdwara.

An FIR was registered under Sections 281 (rash driving), 125B (endangering life or personal safety of others), 105 and 238 (causing disappearance of evidence) of the BNS in the matter. PTI MNR VN VN