Published Oct 26, 2026 | 10:57 PM ⚊ Updated Oct 26, 2026 | 11:15 PM
Jayabalakrishnan
Synopsis: The fatal accident reportedly caused by a minor boy has justifiably sparked another round of overpowering grief and indignation in Kerala, especially since it came two weeks after a 19-year-old student, allegedly driving under the influence, rammed his swanky Mini Cooper into a scooter, killing three young friends. In the latest incident, the boy, 17-year-old son of a judge, was speeding on his father’s Merc when he smashed into a two-wheeler, killing a 55-year-old man returning from work. Both incidents occurred in the wee hours. Amid the collective indignation and accusations against the police, one question remains: should the law take its course, or yield to public sentiment?
The road was familiar — so was the darkness. The air had an extra nip, and the patch of road that momentarily lit up shakily as the scooter buzzed forward was still wet from the rain. Occasionally, container trucks passed by, disturbing the silence. The darker silhouettes of vegetation rose against the night, hiding the lake beyond.
It was a long night, as usual, for Jayabalakrishnan, 55, but familiar. He had just left his family-run thattukada, a small wayside eatery near the Sree Krishnaswamy Temple in Kochi’s Chittoor. He took his scooter through the familiar National Highway-996A, better known as Container Terminal Road.
Nothing was extraordinary or unfamiliar to him as he rode home.
Unknown to Jayabalakrishnan, the unexpected was then bolting toward him, driven by a rush of adrenaline and reportedly exceeding 100 kmph. His scooter was no match for the Mercedes-Benz that smashed it from behind and flung the man onto the road near Maraparambu in Cheranalloor between 2 am and 3 am on Sunday, 25 October.
It was not familiar for Jayabalakrishnan. He might not have had time to think or complain. Perhaps he didn’t even grasp what was happening. He did not survive to recall the moment.
If the Merc had not hit the stretch, Jayabalakrishnan would have reached his residence in the Manjali-South Chittoor area for a well-deserved sleep. Instead, his life was allegedly cut short by a 17-year-old boy, who reportedly decided to go on a joyride while his parents slept.
Also Read: Judge arraigned for allegedly allowing minor son to drive
”My father did not deserve this,” his daughter Bhadrakeerthi told reporters in Kochi, a day after her father’s death. The family has not yet come to terms with their loss.
Jayabalakrishnan at his shop (File image)
Jayabalakrishnan, a doting father, had named his eatery after his daughter. He had opened Keerthi Dosakkada (dosa shop) in February 1980. Initially, it was located near the Chittoor Ferry. The eatery catered to customers from 6 pm to midnight.
The shop’s revenue was modest. Yet it supported the family.
Jayabalakrishnan’s relatives and neighbours were at the Cheranalloor Circle Inspector’s office, protesting what they described as the police’s initial leniency towards the teenager. The family alleged that the accused received preferential treatment because his father is an Additional District and Sessions Judge at Irinjalakuda in the neighbouring Thrissur district.
The judge is the car’s registered owner.
Bhadrakeerthi said she won’t let it go. She vowed to fight for justice and is preparing to meet Chief Minister VD Satheesan to seek swift action. Incidentally, Cheranelloor borders North Paravur, Satheesan’s Assembly constituency.
Jayabalakrishnan’s nephew Ananthakrishnan was with the crowd at the police station. ”My uncle was a hardworking person who lived for his family. His father, Ramaswamy, was also in the same business,” he told South First.
He alleged that the police’s initial approach had left the family worried that they might be denied justice. Bhadrakeerthi, he added, was emotionally shattered by her father’s death, and the police’s attitude depressed her more.
The family also alleged that the police personnel helped to destroy evidence.
They said a police officer handed over a mobile phone containing footage of the teenager at the accident scene to a person accompanying him. The person allegedly deleted the visuals. The family said the incident strengthened their suspicion that the investigation was being sabotaged.
The family also questioned the judge’s reported claim that his son had driven the car for the first time, saying it was hard to believe.
Suhail Sajeev before (left) and after arrest.
Cheranalloor police told South First that they registered a First Information Report immediately after receiving the complaint and were trying to obtain CCTV footage and other evidence. The family, however, said it had lost confidence in the police and demanded action against both the teenager and his father.
Bhadrakeerthi and her family were not alone in their anger. The collective conscience of Kerala raised its voice as the incident that claimed her father came close on the heels of a speeding Mini Cooper killing three young friends at Nedumbassery.
The Mini’s 19-year-old driver, Suhail Sajeev, had alcohol five times above the allowed limit in his blood when the car hit the scooter on which the friends were riding around 1.45 am on 11 October. Incidentally, it too was a Sunday. Sajeev hails from an affluent business family.
Also Read: 17-year-old boy held after Mercedes rams scooter, killing rider in Kochi
The legal proceedings took several turns after Jayabalakrishnan’s premature demise.
The car involved in the Cheranalloor accident
The police initially registered a case under Sections 281 and 106(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), dealing with rash driving on a public way and causing death by negligence. The teenager was initially released on station bail under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015.
The decision triggered protests by the victim’s relatives and neighbours.
The police subsequently apprehended the teenager again, added Section 105 of the BNS, which deals with culpable homicide not amounting to murder and produced him before the Ernakulam Juvenile Justice Board.
The Board granted him bail on Monday, 26 October, prompting renewed protests.
Investigators said the teenager told them during the initial proceedings that he had taken the car for a drive without his parents’ knowledge. The police said he was not intoxicated and was alone in the vehicle. Police have reportedly gathered evidence suggesting that the car was driven at a high speed.
An officer said the teenager had not been taken to the police station at night because minors could not be brought there under the applicable procedure. The officer denied apprehending him at his residence but declined to disclose further details.
Home Minister Ramesh Chennithala admitted to lapses in the initial handling of the case in the Assembly on Monday.
He questioned how the police had failed to invoke the more serious charge at the outset. He said he had raised the matter with Kochi City Police Commissioner S Kaliraj Mahesh Kumar and later with the State Police Chief.
”The probe will not yield to influence or power,” Chennithala said, promising strict action.
The investigation has since been transferred from Cheranalloor police to the District Crime Branch, with a Special Investigation Team (SIT) also set to probe the accident. Police have said they intend to challenge the teenager’s bail before the competent Sessions Court.
Also Read: ‘My father will take care of everything,’ accused in Mini Cooper crash allegedly says
Meanwhile, the Kerala High Court granted administrative permission for the police to register a case against the judge. The court also sought a report on the incident. The judge was booked under Sections 199A(1) and 199A(2) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, concerning the responsibility of guardians or vehicle owners when juveniles commit traffic offences.
The provisions carry potential criminal liability, including imprisonment of up to three years and a fine of ₹25,000, subject to the law’s conditions and available defences.
The High Court observed that the events surrounding the accident had brought disrepute to the judiciary and insulted the institution.
Advocate Akash S, speaking to South First, explained that Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice Act generally provides for bail to a child alleged to have committed an offence, with or without sureties, unless specified statutory exceptions apply.
Bail may be refused if there are reasonable grounds to believe that release would bring the child into association with known criminals, expose the child to moral, physical or psychological danger, or defeat the ends of justice.
”The fact that an offence is serious does not, by itself, mean that the same bail rules applicable to an adult can simply be applied to a child, ” he said, adding that the Board must assess the statutory framework and the individual circumstances.
On Section 199A, he said the guardian or vehicle owner could be deemed guilty in circumstances covered by the provision, subject to the statutory defence that the offence occurred without their knowledge or that they exercised due diligence to prevent it.
Also Read: Keralam mulls tougher drunk driving law
The case has also exposed a difficult tension between public outrage and the requirement for an evidence-based investigation.
Advocate Sreejith Perumana told South First that the accused person’s name or address might not appear in the initial FIR in an accident case if the driver’s identity had not yet been established.
”Evidence such as CCTV footage, eyewitness accounts and statements is needed to identify someone as the accused,” he said, arguing that the police acted efficiently and should not be expected to act according to public sentiment.
He also criticised the High Court’s observation as immature, pointing to the pressure social media and public opinion put on institutions ranging from the judiciary to the Cabinet and the media.
Referring to the Supreme Court’s controversial observation in the Afzal Guru case about satisfying the ”collective conscience of society”, he questioned whether public sentiment should determine the course of justice.
An official at the Regional Transport Office told South First that a report on the accident had already been submitted to higher authorities and that further proceedings would follow after the new chief took charge, expected on Monday or Tuesday.
The official said the Motor Vehicles Department regularly monitors the Container Road stretch.
The Enforcement RTO did not respond to requests for comment.
(Edited by Majnu Babu).
