A Kurla magistrate court Friday rejected the bail appeal of 35-year-old lawyer, Janhavi Gadkar, who was arrested for allegedly killing two people by ramming into their vehicle in an inebriated state.
This was her second bail appeal which was rejected by the court on the grounds that merely spending more days in custody cannot be considered as a ground for change in circumstances and granting bail. On July 22, Gadkar’s lawyer, Mahesh Sabnis had argued that 44 days have lapsed since her arrest and material witness statements have been recorded and all the medical tests have been done.
- Kamla Mills fire: Supreme Court refuses interim bail to restaurateur
- Corporate lawyer Janhavi Gadkar gets bail in drunk driving case
- Gadkar’s lawyer in court: Don’t malign law fraternity
- Audi crash: Janhavi Gadkar’s bail plea rejected, judicial custody extended till July 10
- Audi Crash: Lawyers say treatment given to Gadkar insufficient, court seeks medical records
- Audi crash: Gadkar remanded in judicial custody till June 26
According to her lawyer, Ashwin Thool, her first bail application was rejected by a magistrate on grounds that merely 17 days had been passed since the incident and that the investigation was still under process. These grounds cease to exist while filling the second bail appeal, the lawyer said.
Gadkar was allegedly speeding at 120 kmph in her Audi Q3 and lightly scraped two cars before colliding with a taxi, killing the driver and a passenger. Gadkar survived mostly unhurt as the Audi’s airbags opened, leaving her with a few bruises.
The magistrate court also observed that section 304(II) (culpable homicide not amounting to murder) under the Indian Penal Code was a serious offence and is exclusively triable by the sessions court and hence, the appeal is rejected.
The prosecution had earlier argued that the report presented by the investigating officer shows that the investigation is still in process.
While arguing for Gadkar, her advocate said that there was no reason for her to “tamper” with the evidence and that the traffic authorities were maligning the law fraternity by putting up posters of lawyer’s collar illustrated as two cars in an accident, which reads, “no one is above the law, not even the law”.