Context ho jaaye? So basically, a man in his 20s was very high and he killed an individual! YES. 

India has yet again witnessed the intersection of outrage and legalities with the Supreme Court deciding to grant bail to the accused in the Vadodara Car Accident. 

Since this ruling, many Indian citizens have begun to provide their own opinion on the court’s decision and it’s anything but subtle. 

Many have stated that the decision was “unfair”, while others have referred to it as “a simple case of following procedure”. Before forming a conclusion about the ruling, let’s examine what actually happened and the reason for the Court’s ruling.

The Events of the Vadodara Car Accident Case

The events of the Vadodara Car Accident Case were not labelled as an accident in the beginning. The events on the night of the car accident were considered a tragedy by all involved.

On the night of the accident, 23-year-old Rakshit Chaurasiya, a law student, was speeding through the streets of Vadodara in his Volkswagen Virtus. Eyewitnesses and CCTV footage show that he lost control of his vehicle and crashed into both a motorcycle and several pedestrians.

Following the crash, Hemaliben Patel died at the scene, whereas 7 other people sustained serious injuries, including a 12-year-old child.

Eyewitness accounts of the crash described utter and massive chaos quickly after the crash. Reports even indicated that after leaving the vehicle, Chaurasiya was seen shouting, “Another round.” This comment, in itself, contributed to the general public’s outrage and influenced the overall narrative surrounding this case.

The Legal Case Regarding the Vadodara Car Accident Case

It did not take long for the legal case surrounding the Vadodara Car Accident to escalate to more than just a simple car accident.

After an investigation was conducted into the matter, investigators accused Chaurasiya of being under the influence of drugs at the time of the accident. Initially, he denied consuming any drugs, but later admitted to consuming bhaang (marijuana).

The investigation has resulted in Chaurasiya being charged under both:

1. The Narcotics and Psychotropic Substances Act, (1985) (for drug offenses) 

2. Section 185 of the Motor Vehicles Act (for driving under the influence). 

The accumulation of these two offences has resulted in this case being classified as a major criminal case. The circumstances surrounding this tragic incident have changed significantly from one of merely reckless driving to leaving a major legal impact with multiple layers of criminal activity, including the use of drugs and/or narcotic substances, and this tragedy leading to the death of another individual and the cause of this death through negligent actions. 

The First Major Legal Turning Point in Vadodara Car Accident Case: Gujarat High Court Decision Regarding Bail

The first major legal turning point in the Vadodara car crash case occurred when the Gujarat High Court granted conditional bail to Chaurasiya (the accused). 

Yes, shocker no.1, courtesy of the Supreme Court… 

The Gujarat High Court considered four significant factors when making its decision regarding bail.

• The accused had no significant criminal background.
• The accused was a college/university student.
• The accused had already been incarcerated for a considerable period, approximately (8) eight months. 

Although the court did not minimize the seriousness of the incident, it approached the bail hearing by focusing on legal principles rather than emotional appeals. 

As a result, the decision created a strong backlash from the public, many of whom were upset that the punishment for this behaviour did not seem to correlate with the severity of the crime. 

However, in the legal context, a defendant has a right to a presumption of innocence until proven guilty and, therefore, is entitled to be released on bail pending further legal action. 

Hmm… 

Vadodara Car Accident Case to be Re-Evaluated by Supreme Court. Supreme Court Upholds the Gujarat High Court Bail Decision.

The legal case against Chaurasiya does not stop at the Gujarat High Court decision, as the state appealed the bail decision to the Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court confirmed the bail granted by the Gujarat High Court.

The Supreme Court found:

• The accused has already served nearly nine (9) months of his sentence.
• The incident was not premeditated or intentional.
• The issue of bail is applicable to the charge of rash driving only. 

In addition to its ruling, the Supreme Court clarified an important distinction when reviewing files for drug-related charges. 

Drug-related charges are handled and treated differently than other criminal charges and, therefore, shall be handled and prosecuted differently. The Court’s decision has not erased the allegations of wrongdoing.

The court has not decided that “nothing happened”; rather, it has determined that “the trial will provide an answer to whether or not a crime took place; however, the accused will not remain in custody without being convicted.”

Vadodara Car Crash: The Supreme Court’s Logic on Bail

While many people may disagree with the logic that the Supreme Court has applied to the Vadodara car crash case, it is based on the premise that the function of bail hearings is not to determine guilt, but rather to ask the following questions:

• Has the person accused already spent significant time in custody?

• Is this person likely to flee?

• Did the accused act intentionally or plan the actions in advance?

• Can a trial take place without the need to place the accused in custody?

After considering these questions, the court decided in favour of granting the accused bail. This approach appears to be contrary to common sense, we agree, however, this system was created to prevent punishment ahead of conviction.

Vadodara Car Crash Case and Legal Discussion: What Is the Supreme Court Decision on Bail?

The Vadodara car crash case raises the question of whether or not making bail means that justice has failed.

Hear us out…

Making bail essentially allows an individual to be released from custody with some conditions attached to the release. It doesn’t negate the upcoming court hearing, or subsequent motions and evidence presented at trial, nor does it declare the individual innocent of the crime.

The individual will still have:

• Pending legal proceedings
• Pending associated with NDPS 
• A final court determination based on evidence presented at trial.

Making bail essentially allows the case to shift from custodial status to courtroom status. Now the whole country watches gawk-eyed as the final verdict comes through.