Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas partly set aside the sessions court order which had discharged the IAS officer from the charge.
Published Apr 13, 2023 | 3:24 PM ⚊ Updated Apr 13, 2023 | 3:24 PM
Kerala High Court. (Creative Commons)
The Kerala High Court on Thursday, 13 April, set aside a lower court order that dropped the charge of culpable homicide not amounting to murder against IAS officer Sreeram Venkitaraman in a road accident case that resulted in the death of journalist KM Basheer in 2019.
Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas partly set aside the sessions court order which had discharged the IAS officer from the charge of culpable homicide not amounting to murder under Section 304 of the Indian Penal Code.
Earlier, on 25 November last year, the high court had issued an interim stay on the lower court order.
The high court was of the prima facie view that the IAS officer was overspeeding at the time of the accident and that he tried to destroy evidence in the case.
Sreeram Venkitaraman. (KB Jayachandran)
The court, however, discharged co-accused Wafa Feroze, to whom the car belonged and who was travelling with Venkitaraman at the time of the accident, from the case.
The order came on the criminal revision petition filed by the state government against the sessions court verdict.
The sessions court had, in October last year, dropped the charge under Section 304 of the IPC against Venkitaraman, but had said that the other charges, including Sections 304 A (causing death by negligence) and 279 (rash and negligent driving), stand.
Feroze was charged with abetting the IAS officer to drive the car rashly.
Venkitaraman was allegedly drunk and behind the wheel of the speeding car which had fatally knocked down the journalist in Thiruvananthapuram in August 2019, according to the police. The IAS officer was returning from a private party past midnight, it had said.
The sessions court dismissed charges under Section 304 IPC (punishment for culpable homicide) and Section 201 (causing the disappearance of evidence of an offence or giving false information) on 19 October last year.
The court, however, upheld charges registered under Sections 304-A (causing death by negligence) and 279 (rash and negligent driving) of the IPC and Section 184 of the Motor Vehicles Act.
Venkitaraman had argued that there was no evidence proving he had driven the vehicle in a drunken state, causing the hit-and-run case.
The high court also directed the lower court to halt the trial in the case for the next three months. The government had sought time to fix certain inaccuracies in the case.
Meanwhile, the high court would hear the prosecution and Venkitraman’s counsel and issue a final order on the charges to be registered.
In the criminal revision petition, the state government informed the high court that, according to witnesses, both Venkitaraman and Firoz were under the influence of alcohol at the time of the incident. The petition also mentioned the duo’s reluctance in providing blood samples, allegedly to destroy evidence.
The government also argued that Venkitraman had tried to delay treatment when he was taken to the General Hospital in Thiruvananthapuram after the accident.
The prosecution has also informed the high court that the doctor at the General Hospital had asked the accused to consult a surgeon and referred him to the Medical College Hospital, Thiruvananthapuram, for injuries sustained in the incident.
The IAS officer, however, went to KIMS Hospital, Thiruvananthapuram, without informing the police. It was also understood that the accused “purposely delayed” the collection of his blood sample to dilute the alcohol content. The lower court did not consider the delay, the high court was told.
“The statements of witnesses, in unequivocal terms, stated that the first accused was in an inebriated state. Being a qualified doctor and a civil servant, he is well aware of the natural consequences,” the revision petition said.
It further argued that if the act was done with “the knowledge of the dangerous consequences” the case would fall under Section 304 IPC.
“Knowledge is the awareness of the person concerned about the consequences of his omission or commission, indicating his state of mind. There may be knowledge of likely consequences without any intention. Hence, the court below ought to have proceeded with the trial of the accused under Section 304 IPC,” the petition added.
The prosecution also claimed that the lower court had exceeded its jurisdiction in exercising its power of discharge and acted beyond the scope of Section 227 CrPC.
On 3 August, 2019, Venkitaraman’s friends organised a cocktail party in his honour at a guest house for IAS officers in Kowdiar. After the party, Venkitaraman and Firoz drove off in the latter’s Volkswagen Vento, allegedly drunk.
Venkitaraman taking charge as collector of Alappuzha. (Supplied)
Basheer was on his way home when their speeding car spun out of control and killed him. It was reported that Feroze had initially said that she was at the wheels, which was disputed by eyewitnesses.
The incident and the subsequent police probe led to widespread resentment against the Pinarayi Vijayan-led LDF government, which allegedly took a stand favouring Venkitaraman. The charge sheet against him listed 100 witnesses and submitted 75 items of evidence.
The journalists union and Basheer’s family accused the government of conducting a botched probe.
Though suspended from service after the incident, he was reinstated as the joint secretary of the Department of Health and Social Justice in March 2020 despite a public outcry against the move.
His subsequent appointment as district collector of Alappuzha invited massive criticism. Within a week, he was transferred and appointed as head of the Kerala State Civil Supplies Corporation in Ernakulam.
When reports alleged that Venkitaraman was destroying evidence, Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan said that the government would not let him scot-free. He said the rule of the law would prevail, and Basheer would get justice.
On his part, Venkitaraman maintained that he was suffering from retrograde amnesia — a form of memory loss.
According to the World Health Organisation, “Driving under the influence of alcohol, or drink-driving, is a key risk factor for 27 percent of all road injuries.”
(With PTI inputs)
