Delhi BMW crash: Accused Gaganpreet Kaur’s judicial custody extended till Sept 27, bail hearing on Saturday

Accused Gaganpreet Kaur

Delhi's Patiala House Court on Wednesday granted Delhi Police time to argue accused Gaganpreet Kaur's bail plea in the BMW accident case that claimed the life of a Deputy Secretary in the Finance Ministry last week.

According to a report by ANI, the Judicial Magistrate First Class (JMFC) granted the prosecution time until Saturday to oppose Kaur's bail plea. The Delhi Police has filed its reply on the bail plea. Meanwhile, the court extended the judicial custody of Gaganpreet Kaur till September 27.

The court has also issued notice on the application for preservation of CCTV footage of the accident. The court is to hear the application tomorrow. The counsel for the accused has moved this application.

At the outset of the hearing on the bail plea, senior advocate Ramesh Gupta submitted that this is a simple accident case. Invoking the section related to culpable homicide not amounting to murder is totally unwanted.

The senior advocate also submitted that there was no proper investigation. There is an interview of DCP, he should be made a witness by the investigation officer. An ambulance also came on the spot, but he did not carry the injured to the hospital. Should he not be accused? the senior advocate questioned.

He further argued that there was a DTC bus. It should have been impounded.

"I expect that the police will investigate the case in a fair manner," the senior advocate submitted.
He also submitted that the case diary is not paginated. It should be done as per the mandate of law.
There were two witnesses at the spot.

The senior advocate argued that the police are saying that she took the injured far away to a hospital, which attracts section 304 of the IPC against her; it is totally unwarranted.

On the other hand, Delhi Police opposed the bail plea. Police were quoted by ANI as saying that the first information was received from the hospital. The accused was not seriously injured despite she got herself admitted in the ICU. She took the injured to a hospital far away from the spot. It raises serious doubt.

Advocate Atul Kumar, counsel for the family of victims, also opposed the bail plea. He said the accused took the injured to the hospital 20 kilometres away, known to her family.

The injured was kept on a stretcher. Whereas the accused was admitted to the ICU, though she was not seriously injured, the counsel submitted. She was in the ICU for hours. She did not inform the police. Neither did she make a call to an ambulance from the spot. It shows the conduct of the accused. The counsel submitted that we can imagine the speed of the car that got overturned. Airbags opened after the accident.

"Why did the accused not make an ambulance call? The army base hospital is a minute away from the spot," the counsel questioned.

The public prosecutor submitted that he is not prepared to argue the bail. He should be granted time to oppose the bail plea.