BMW hit-and-run case: HC refuses to release prime accused Mihir Shah on ground of 'illegal' arrest

Prime accused Mihir Shah and his driver Rajrishi Bindawat had challenged the grounds of their arrest, claiming it was ‘illegal’

The Bombay High Court on Monday (November 25, 2024) dismissed the petitions filed by the prime accused of the Worli-hit-and-run case Mihir Shah and his driver Rajrishi Bindawat. Both the accused had challenged their arrests arguing that as per the Supreme Court mandate, they were not served with the grounds of arrest in written format which makes their arrest an ‘illegal’ one.

A Division Bench of Justice Bharati Dangre and Justice Manjusha Deshpande observed, “Both the petitions are dismissed.”

Mr. Mihr Shah (24), son of Chief Minister Eknath Shinde’s close aide Rajesh Shah, was arrested on July 9, 2024, for allegedly hitting a couple who were on a two-wheeler. A woman named Kaveri Nakhwa was killed around 5.15 a.m. on July 7. Victim’s husband Pradeep Liladhar Nakhwa was injured in the accident.

According to police, Mr. Mihir Shah admitted to hitting the couple under the influence of alcohol. He also admitted to seeing their bodies fly up in the air, dragging Kaveri Nakhwa from anywhere from 100 metres and 1.5 kilometres speeding off towards Bandra Worli Sea Link.

After committing the alleged crime, he swapped seats with the driver, took an auto-rickshaw from Bandra East’s Kala Nagar and went to a friend’s home in Goregaon. Since then, he was on the run to different locations — from Goregaon to Borivali and then to a resort in Thane. Mr. Mihir Shah was arrested only two days after the crime, whereas the driver was arrested on the day of the incident.

Representing the accused, advocates Rishi Bhuta and Niranjan Mundargi argued that the police did not provide any documents stating the grounds of their arrest as they should have been done under Section 50 of the Code of Criminal Procedure [CrPC]. Under Section 50, the police have to communicate the particulars of the offence before arresting the person accused in the case.

Further detention in the case would only contribute to the violation of the CrPC. This is an illegal detention and violation of their fundamental rights to personal liberty, the advocates argued and sought quashing of the remand orders, giving them immediate release.

Opposing the petition, public prosecutor Hiten Venegaonkar argued that the accused were fully aware of the charges against them at the time of arrest.

The judges questioned the necessity of informing the accused the reason of their arrest when they were arrested red-handed. The court observed, “Let this be a test case to evaluate whether in cases like these, whether informing the accused about the grounds of arrest is essential or not when the seriousness of the offence is clearly pointing out their involvement in the case. The fundamental rights of the victims too need to be taken into account.”

Published - November 25, 2024 11:59 am IST