GEEVARGHESE K.A., vs STATE OF KERALA,

CNR : KLHC010785902026

2026:KER:84602
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE KAUSER EDAPPAGATH
TH
WEDNESDAY, THE 4 DAY OF NOVEMBER 2026 / 13TH KARTHIKA, 1948
BAIL APPL. NO. 6173 OF 2026
CRIME NO.1273/2026 OF KUNNAMKULAM POLICE STATION, THRISSUR
PETITIONER/ACCUSED:
GEEVARGHESE K.A.,
AGED 42 YEARS
S/O KUNJACKO,ANTHIKAD HOUSE, KANIPAYOOR OXYGEN
PARK DESOM,KANIPAYOOR, THRISSUR DISTRICT,
PIN – 680517.
BY ADVS.
SRI.M.R.SASITH
SRI.M.R.SARIN
SHRI.MUHAMMED SULFIKAR
SMT.PARVATHI KRISHNA
SRI.P.SANTHOSHKUMAR (KARUMKULAM)
SMT.REETHU JACOB
SMT.ANJANA SURESH.E
SMT.HASNA JABIL
SMT.ANN GINI ROY
SHRI.VENKETESH S.P.
SMT.MAHALEKSHMY P.S
SMT.SEETHAL P.S.
SMT.R.K.CHIRUTHA
RESPONDENT/S TATE :
STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT
OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN – 682031.
SRI.THOMAS SABU VADAKKEKUT-PP
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
04.11.2026, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

CNR : KLHC010785902026

B.A.No.6173 OF 2026 2
2026:KER:84602

‘C.R.’

ORDER
This application is filed under Section 483 of the
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, seeking regular bail.
2. The applicant is the sole accused in Crime
No.1273/2026 of Kunnamkulam Police Station, Thrissur District.
The offences alleged are punishable under Section 105 of the
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short, BNS) and Section 185 of
the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short, ‘MV Act’).
3. The prosecution case, in short, is that on 05.10.2026
at about 10.30 p.m., the applicant drove a Scorpio Car bearing
registration No. KL-45-B-4008, in a rash and negligent manner
under the influence of alcohol, so as to endanger human life, and
collided with a motorcycle bearing registration No. KL-46-F-3110
ridden by one Lenin, causing grievous injuries resulting in his
death.
4. I have heard Sri.M.R.Sasith, the learned counsel for
the applicant and Sri.Thomas Sabu Vadakekut, the learned Public
Prosecutor. Perused the case diary.

CNR : KLHC010785902026

B.A.No.6173 OF 2026 3
2026:KER:84602
5. The learned counsel appearing for the applicant
submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated and is
innocent of the allegations levelled against him. According to the
learned counsel, the incident was purely accidental in nature and
cannot be attributed to any deliberate or intentional act of the
applicant. It was further submitted that the essential ingredients
of Section 105 of the BNS are absent, inasmuch as the applicant
had neither the requisite intention nor the knowledge necessary
to attract the said provision. On the aforesaid premises, it was
argued that the applicant is entitled to the relief of bail. The
learned Public Prosecutor, however, opposed the application,
contending that the incident was the outcome of the applicant's
intentional criminal conduct and that no grounds are made out for
granting bail at this stage.
6. The materials on record reveal that the applicant and
the deceased were travelling on their respective vehicles along
the Choondal-Kunnamkulam road, which runs in an east-west
direction from Choondal towards Kunnamkulam. The prosecution
case is that the car ridden by the applicant struck the rear portion
of the motorcycle ridden by the deceased when the latter
allegedly took a right turn towards Unity Hospital, Kanippayur. The

CNR : KLHC010785902026

B.A.No.6173 OF 2026 4
2026:KER:84602
Certificate of Drunkenness indicates that the applicant was under
the influence of alcohol at the relevant time. The breath analyser
test is stated to have recorded a blood alcohol concentration of 86
mg per 100 ml of blood, as against the prescribed permissible
limit of 30 mg per 100 ml. At the same time, it is seen that the
investigation is almost complete and that the applicant has no
criminal antecedents. Having regard to the stage of the
investigation and the antecedents of the applicant, I am of the
view that his continued custodial detention is not warranted for
the purposes of investigation. In the above circumstances, the
applicant is entitled to be released on bail, subject to the following
conditions:
(i) He shall execute a bond for Rs.1,00,000/-
(Rupees One lakh only) with two solvent sureties for the like sum
each to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Magistrate/Court.
(ii) He shall fully co-operate with the investigation.
(iii) He shall appear before the investigating officer
between 10.00 a.m. and 11.00 a.m. every Saturday until further
orders. He shall also appear before the investigating officer as and
when required.
(iv) He shall not commit any offence of a like nature
while on bail.

CNR : KLHC010785902026

B.A.No.6173 OF 2026 5
2026:KER:84602
(v) He shall not attempt to contact any of the
prosecution witnesses, directly or through any other person, or in
any other way try to tamper with the evidence or influence any
witnesses or other persons related to the investigation.
(vi) He shall not leave the State of Kerala without the
permission of the trial court.
(vii) The application, if any, for deletion/modification
of the bail conditions or cancellation of bail on the grounds of
violating the bail conditions shall be filed at the jurisdictional
court.
7. Instances of road traffic accidents attributable to
drunken driving are a matter of serious and growing concern.
Such incidents result in the loss of innumerable lives and leave
families and communities irreparably affected. Recognising the
grave threat posed by drunken and reckless driving to public
safety, the MV Act confers upon the Licensing Authority the power
to disqualify a person from holding a driving licence or to revoke
the same in appropriate cases. Section 19(1) of the MV Act
enumerates the circumstances in which such power may be
exercised. Under clause (c) thereof, where the Licensing
Authority, after affording the holder of the driving licence an

CNR : KLHC010785902026

B.A.No.6173 OF 2026 6
2026:KER:84602
opportunity of being heard, is satisfied that he has used or has
been using a motor vehicle in the commission of a cognizable
offence, it may, for reasons to be recorded in writing, disqualify
such person for a specified period from holding or obtaining a
driving licence, or revoke the licence altogether. The legal position
is well settled that, whenever the Licensing Authority is satisfied
that the holder of a driving licence has used a motor vehicle in the
commission of a cognizable offence, it is competent to initiate
proceedings under Section 19 of the MV Act (See Peethambaran
T.R. v. Additional Licensing Authority 2012 (3) KLT 622). It is
equally well settled that the exercise of power under Section 19(1)
of the MV Act is not contingent upon a finding of guilt by a
competent criminal court. The Licensing Authority may
independently arrive at the requisite satisfaction on the materials
available before it and pass an order of disqualification or
revocation in accordance with law (See Sijo Joseph v. Transport
Commissioner and Others , 2020 (1) KHC 321). Thus, where the
conditions stipulated under Section 19(1) of the MV Act are
satisfied, the Licensing Authority is not required to await the
culmination of the criminal proceedings and may invoke its
statutory powers forthwith, subject to compliance with the
principles of natural justice.

CNR : KLHC010785902026

B.A.No.6173 OF 2026 7
2026:KER:84602
8. Under clause (f) of sub-section (1) of Section 19 of the
MV Act, the Licensing Authority may make such an order if it is
satisfied, after giving the holder of a driving licence an
opportunity of being heard, that he has committed any such act,
which is likely to cause nuisance or danger to the public, as may
be prescribed by the Central Government, having regard to the
objects of the said Act. Rule 21 of the Central Motor Vehicles
Rules, 1989 deals with the powers of the Licensing Authority to
disqualify. As per Rule 21, for the purpose of clause (f) of sub-
section (1) of Section 19 of the MV Act, the commission of the acts
enumerated in clauses (1) to (25) thereof, by the holder of a
driving licence shall constitute nuisance or danger to the public.
9. The Supreme Court Committee on Road Safety
(SCCoRS), constituted pursuant to the directions of the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in S. Rajaseekaran v. Union of India [(2014) 6
SCC 36] for monitoring and overseeing the implementation of
road safety measures across the country, has directed all States
and Union Territories to take action under Section 19 of the MV
Act read with Rule 21 of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules by
suspending driving licences for a period of not less than three
months in cases involving: (i) driving at a speed exceeding the
prescribed limit, including red-light violations; (ii) overloading of

CNR : KLHC010785902026

B.A.No.6173 OF 2026 8
2026:KER:84602
goods carriages and carriage of passengers in goods vehicles; (iii)
driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs; and (iv) use of
mobile phones while driving. Following the principles laid down in
Rajaseekaran (supra) and the directions issued by the Supreme
Court Committee on Road Safety, this Court, in Anoop v. State
of Kerala [2019 (4) KLT 615], held that, upon detection of
offences such as overspeeding, overloading, drunken driving, use
of mobile phones while driving, and other similar violations, the
duly authorised police officers and officers of the Motor Vehicles
Department shall forthwith forward the driving licence of the
offending driver to the Licensing Authority, enabling it to initiate
proceedings under Section 19(1) of the MV Act.
10. Despite these statutory provisions and judicial
directives, it appears that the power of disqualification or
revocation of driving licences under Section 19 of the MV Act is
invoked only sparingly. Such reluctance undermines the
legislative intent underlying the provision and diminishes its
deterrent effect. At a time when incidents of drunken driving
continue to claim precious lives and leave families devastated, it
is imperative that the authorities exercise the powers conferred
under Section 19 of the MV Act with the seriousness that the
situation demands. Effective enforcement of the provision would

CNR : KLHC010785902026

B.A.No.6173 OF 2026 9
2026:KER:84602
not only serve the purpose of accountability but would also act as
a powerful deterrent against irresponsible and dangerous conduct
on public roads.
11. The significance of road safety has recently been
underscored by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Re: Phalodi
Accident v. National Highways Authority of India and
Others [2026 SCC OnLine SC 646], wherein the Court expressly
linked road safety to the guarantee of life and personal liberty
under Article 21 of the Constitution. Emphasising that the safety
of the commuter forms an integral facet of the right to live with
dignity, the Court observed that ensuring safe road conditions is
not merely a matter of policy but a constitutional obligation
resting upon the State. Exercising its powers under Article 142 of
the Constitution, the Supreme Court proceeded to issue pan-India
directions aimed at reducing road fatalities and strengthening
road safety governance.
12. In the aforesaid circumstances, this Court deems it
appropriate to direct the Transport Commissioner to ensure,
through the competent enforcement authorities of the Motor
Vehicles Department, that prompt and effective action is taken
under Section 19(1) of the MV Act read with Rule 21 of the Central
Motor Vehicles Rules in appropriate cases involving drunken

CNR : KLHC010785902026

B.A.No.6173 OF 2026 10
2026:KER:84602
driving. In particular, where a road traffic accident is prima facie
attributable to a driver's state of intoxication, the Licensing
Authority shall examine the matter without delay and consider the
initiation of proceedings for disqualification or revocation of the
driving licence in accordance with law.
13. The learned Public Prosecutor, on instructions,
submitted that no steps have so far been taken for initiating
proceedings under Section 19 of the MV Act against the applicant.
In the light of the statutory scheme and the directions referred to
above, the Investigating Officer shall forthwith transmit the driving
licence of the applicant along with the relevant records to the
competent Licensing Authority for initiating proceedings under
Section 19(1) of the MV Act. The Licensing Authority shall
thereupon proceed with the matter in accordance with law after
complying with the principles of natural justice.
The bail application is disposed of as above. The Registry is
directed to forward a copy of this order to the Transport
Commissioner, Kerala.
Sd/-
DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH
JUDGE
mea

CNR : KLHC010785902026

B.A.No.6173 OF 2026 11
2026:KER:84602
APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. NO. 6173 OF 2026
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure A1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED
09.10.2026 IN C.M.P. NO. 1/2026 PASSED
BY THE HON’BLE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS
MAGISTRATE COURT, KUNNAMKULAM
Annexure A2 THE COPY OF THE REMAND REPORT IN CRIME
NO. 1273/2026 OF KUNNAMKULAM POLICE
STATION