2020 Marine Drive crash: HC upholds dropping of culpable homicide charge against teen driver

The court said there was no material to show that the accused had knowledge that his actions were likely to cause death. “The incident occurred suddenly and the accused also sustained serious injuries. The documents produced on record do not attribute that he had knowledge that the accident would result in fatal consequences,” it said

MUMBAI: The Bombay High Court has upheld a session court’s order of dropping of a culpable homicide charge against a teen driver in the 2020 Marine Drive crash that killed his friend who was his co-passenger, ruling that the incident was accidental and caused by negligence rather than “a criminal intent to cause fatal consequences”.

Mumbai, India - May 12, 2020: Major accident at Marine Drives in Mumbai, India, on Tuesday, May 12, 2020. (Photo by Anshuman Poyrekar/Hindustan Times) (Anshuman Poyrekar/HT Photo)

A single-judge bench of Justice Shivkumar Dige on March 18 dismissed the revision plea filed by Rajesh Nagpal, the victim’s father, challenging the 2024 session court order.

The court said there was no material to show that the accused had knowledge that his actions were likely to cause death. “The incident occurred suddenly and the accused also sustained serious injuries. The documents produced on record do not attribute that he had knowledge that the accident would result in fatal consequences,” it said.

The accident took place on May 12, 2020, during the Covid-19 lockdown, when 19-year-old Shourya Jain crashed his car into a stationary bus at Marine Drive’s B D Somani Chowk. His friend, Aryaman Nagpal, 18, seated in the front passenger seat, suffered serious injuries and died before receiving medical aid. Jain was hospitalised for over a week with rib injuries.

Initially, Jain was under sections related to negligent driving and causing death by negligence. Police later invoked Section 304 Part II (culpable homicide not amounting to murder), noting that Jain did not possess a driving licence. His father, Sharad Jain, was also named as a co-accused.

During the hearing, Rajesh argued that Jain was speeding, unlicensed and violating lockdown rules, and therefore knew his actions could be fatal.

However, the defence maintained that the case amounted to rash and negligent driving, not culpable homicide, as there was no intention or knowledge of likely fatal consequences.

The high court noted that to attract Section 304 Part II, there must be knowledge that the act is likely to cause death. It observed that the accused had basic driving skills and that the collision with the stationary bus was sudden.

The court held that the circumstances suggest a negligent act rather than criminal intent and rejected the plea.