Drunk-Driving Deaths Not Comparable to Rash or Negligent Driving for Bail: Rajasthan High Court Refuses Doctor Bail

According to the prosecution, on the morning of 05.01.2023 the appellant, a Government hospital doctor, drove his car in an inebriated state at that hospital; it rammed into people standing there, killing one person on the spot and causing a pregnant woman's miscarriage (para 1). Seeking bail in this criminal appeal, he said Section 304 IPC was not made out, at most Section 304-A was, as the car lost control at a speed breaker amid congestion; he was near retirement and the challan was filed (paras 2-3). The State and the complainant relied on the Medical Jurist's report that he had consumed alcohol and on the charge sheet showing 4-5 others injured (paras 4-5).

The Court quoted Sanjeev Nanda: drunken driving is a menace, and alcohol impairs consciousness and vision (para 7). It quoted Alister Anthony Pareira: rash or negligent driving on a public road with knowledge of its dangerous character and likely effect, resulting in death, may be culpable homicide not amounting to murder, punishable under Section 304 Part II IPC (para 8). On the FIR, the charge sheet and the medical report, the Court reached a prima facie conclusion that the appellant, a doctor by profession, was well aware of the consequences of driving in an inebriated state under the influence of liquor (para 9). The plea that congestion at the gate caused the loss of control could not be appreciated at this stage, since the trial was yet to take place and the complainant's statement was yet to be recorded (para 10). A doctor with a moral obligation to treat patients had driven drunk on a highly congested road inside his own hospital (para 11). Speeding and drunken driving were increasing and were major causes of road accidents, so the seriousness of the accusation had to be weighed when granting bail (para 12).