IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.G.ARUN MONDAY, THE 17^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2025 / 28TH MAGHA, 1946 CRL.MC NO. 9609 OF 2024 CRIME NO.2076/2023 OF Harbour Police Station, Ernakulam AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN SC NO.949 OF 2024 OF VI ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT, ERNAKULAM PETITIONER:

ANTRIKSH DAGAR AGED 23 YEARS S/O. DEEPAK DAGAR, H. NO. 702, GROUND FLOOR, SHATIKHAND-4, INDIRAPURAM, GHAZIABAD, UTTAR PRADESH – 201014 PRESENTLY RESIDING AT QUARTER NO.

138, CUSTOMS QUARTERS, WELLINGTON ISLAND, THOPPUMPADY VILLAGE, COCHIN, PIN - 682003 BY ADVS. K.RAJEEV V.VISAL AJAYAN NIVEDITHA R. MENON RESPONDENTS:

STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031 BY ADVS.

ADVOCATE GENERAL OFFICE KERALA DIRECTOR GENERAL OF PROSECUTION(AG-10)

P.NARAYANAN, SENIOR G.P. AND ADDL.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR()

SHRI.SAJJU.S., SENIOR G.P.()

OTHER PRESENT:

SRI. G. SUDHEER, PP.

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON

10.02.2025, THE COURT ON 17.02.2025 PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

V.G.ARUN, J = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

Crl.M.C.No.9609 of 2024 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

Dated this the 17^th day of February, 2025

ORDER

Petitioner is the 2^nd accused in Crime No.2076 of 2023 registered at the Harbour Police Station, Ernakulam for offences punishable under Sections 107 and 34 of IPC and Section 188 of the Motor Vehicles Act. The case of the prosecution is that the Harbour Police had registered Crime No.2076/2023 on 25.10.2023 at 3.19 am on the basis of the intimation received from the Casualty Medical Officer of the General Hospital, Ernakulam that one Vinay Mathew, who met with an accident on 25.10.2023 at 2.10 am on the Indira Gandhi Road, Cochin was brought dead to the hospital. After completing investigation, final report was filed alleging that the 1^st accused, who was in a drunken state, drove the car bearing No.UP 78 HE 9180 in a rash and negligent manner and hit against the motor cycle ridden by Vinay Mathew, resulting in his death. The petitioner is arrayed as the 2^nd accused on the allegation that by travelling in the car driven by the 1^st accused, after consuming liquor, he had abetted the 1^st accused to commit the offence. The petitioner is seeking to get the criminal proceedings against him quashed on the ground that, even if the prosecution allegations are accepted in their entirety, the offence of abetment is not made out.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner put forth the following contentions in support of the prayer for quashing the proceedings;

Abetment under Section 107 IPC involves the mental process of instigating a person or intentionally aiding a person in doing a thing. Merely for reason of having travelled in the car driven by a person who had consumed liquor, the passenger cannot be held guilty of abetting the driver to commit the offence. In support of the contention, reliance is placed on the decision in Kanchan Sharma v. State of Uttar Pradesh and Another [(2021) 13 SCC 806]. It is further contended that, for attracting Section 188 of the Motor Vehicles Act also, abetment is the primary ingredient.

3. Learned Public Prosecutor contended that, by his act of travelling in the car driven by the 1^st accused after consuming alcohol, petitioner had encouraged him to drive the vehicle, which ultimately resulted in an innocent person losing his life.

4. To understand as to what would amount to abetment under Section 107 of IPC, the provision, extracted below for easy reference, has to be analysed carefully;

“107. Abetment of a thing- A person abets the doing of a thing, who-

First.—Instigates any person to do that thing; or Secondly.—Engages with one or more other person or persons in any conspiracy for the doing of that thing, if an act or illegal omission takes place in pursuance of that conspiracy, and in order to the doing of that thing; or Thirdly.—Intentionally aids, by any act or illegal omission, the doing of that thing.

Explanation 1.—A person who, by wilful