Mumbai: The law requires that a person must be informed of ‘grounds of arrest’ in writing, said Bombay high court (HC). However, in the Worli luxury car ‘hit-and-run’ case, HC carved an exception. The court said a balance ought to be struck with rights of victim as well. It mentioned that the accused duo, Mihir Shah and his driver Rajrishi Bindawat, could not seek to benefit from police’s failure to furnish them with grounds of arrest when they themselves “were aware of the consequences of their gruesome act”.
“Shah chose to flee from the spot and remained absconding till he was arrested,” said a division bench of Justices Bharati Dangre and Manjusha Deshpande in a reasoned judgment, and he cannot take advantage of rights of an accused. HC dismissed two petitions, each filed by Shah and Bindawat, to declare their arrest illegal and to release them.
Invoking principles of ‘victimology’ and need to develop “humanism” imaginatively, HC said, “For too long, victims of crimes have been the forgotten persons in a criminal justice system. Crime is not a problem of the victim, since the victim did not create it.”
The bench said: “7 July 2024 was the most tormentous and unfortunate day for Pradeep Nakhwa.” He and his wife, Kaveri, were on their way to Worli on their two-wheeler. HC, citing the complaint, said a car hit them at high speed and dragged the wife a distance. She died. The husband was injured. Justice Dangre, who authored the judgment, said the court noted the widower’s “despair” when he was present in court.
Shah and Bidawat’s lawyers, Rishi Bhuta and Niranjan Mundargi respectively, argued long and hard, citing apex court judgments to argue that grounds of arrest in writing are mandated to protect fundamental rights of accused. Public prosecutor HS Venegaonkar, who vehemently opposed the plea, said Bindawat, “found standing next to the vehicle”, was arrested the same day. He showed a ‘fastag’ handed at the toll booth to be in Shah’s name, showing that “he was driving”.
Mihir Shah was arrested on Jul 9 from Palghar via digital tracking, HC noted, and said question was if the two could cite lack of arrest grounds to seek release. HC also said instead of rendering help, the car continued at high speed till it broke down.