Sea Link accident: Sessions court refuses bail to Creta driver

“When the drivers of other three cars could see the first vehicle that met with the accident, contention of the accused blaming system failure cannot be believed,” said the court while rejecting the contention

Mumbai The Mumbai sessions court on Saturday rejected bail plea of Irfan Abdul Rahim Bilakiya, the driver of the speeding SUV that crashed into three stationary vehicles on the Bandra-Worli Sea Link (BWSL) in the early hours on October 5, killing five people and injuring eight others.

Mumbai: Bandra Worli Sea Link road accident accused Irfan Abdul Raheem Beelkia being produced at Bhoiwada Court in Mumbai, Thursday, Oct. 6, 2022. (PTI Photo)(PTI10_06_2022_000149A) (PTI)

Bilakiya had moved the sessions court after a metropolitan magistrate court rejected his bail plea on October 22.

The accident took place at 2.53am, minutes after a Maruti Suzuki Swift had crashed into the barricade on south-bound side of the BWSL (towards Worli) following a tyre burst and the owner of a Maruti Suzuki Baleno stopped to help four stranded occupants of the Swift.

Noticing the vehicles parked on BWSL, the staff assumed that an accident had taken place and sent an ambulance as well as a tow away vehicle to the site. Meanwhile, doctor duo Dr Ankush Tinha (37) and Dr Ashwini Nair (28), both officers of the Indian Navy, had also stopped their Mercedes just ahead of the Swift, assuming that medical help was needed.

Bilakiya’s speeding Hyundai Creta crashed into the vehicles, resulting in death of five persons – the ambulance driver and four BSWL toll staff, and injuring eight persons, including the doctors. Bilakiya, 40, was arrested later in the day, and charged with culpable homicide not amounting to murder, under section 304 (2) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

He had applied for bail claiming that the accident was a result of system failure and an outcome of contributory negligence on part of the government authorities – who failed to take appropriate safety measures after the first accident. He said, as such, he is a victim of the incident and also suffered several injuries. He maintained that the speed of his car at the time was well within permissible limits.

The Worli police had opposed the plea by pointing out that the reflector cones were placed at a considerable distance ahead of the spot and the vehicle driven by the accused had distance of 280 meters in just 92 seconds, recording the speed of 109 km per hour.

The metropolitan magistrate court, however, found no substance in Bilakiya’s contention that the accident was a result of system failure, saying his was the fourth car to reach the spot of incidence. “When the drivers of other three cars could see the first vehicle that met with the accident, contention of the accused blaming system failure cannot be believed,” said the court while rejecting the contention.

The Worli police have recently filed a charge-sheet against him, claiming that the speed of Bilakiya’s car was beyond permissible limit. Besides the police also said that during the investigation it was revealed that he was issued 52 challans for traffic violations and was fined to the tune of ₹36,800.