[warp_10]

Originally Posted by antz.bin

So everyone calling for harshest punishment here and on social media, here is an ethical dilema. Had the 2 people on the 2 wheeler survived due to their helmets, there would be no accidental death charge. Correct?
So they are also (probably) somewhat responsible for their own death due to a law they broke. So is it correct to put a person in jail for a mistake that someone else made?

Seriously ? What are we stooping to ? If they had worn the helmets (I am also unsure if they had or not) and still suffered fatality, folks would have probably gone behind the helmet manufacturers rather than the accused who created the accident. Wearing seat belt or helmets does not preclude fatality. Question to be answered in such scenarios is, what is the most likely cause of the fatality (not about is this the one and only cause).

[Formula1]

What are the possible cases that can be charged against a parent?

The two charges that I saw in the reports seem easily disprovable, and thus done deliberately to save him later.

"Providing alcohol to minor"? Seriously? Did he buy his son a gift card for alcohol?

[Elegant]

Originally Posted by Formula1

What are the possible cases that can be charged against a parent?

The two charges that I saw in the reports seem easily disprovable, and thus done deliberately to save him later.

"Providing alcohol to minor"? Seriously? Did he buy his son a gift card for alcohol?

It is the duty of the parent to ensure that their kid is kept away from influential stuff like alcohol. It is ultimately the mistake of the parent that the kid got access to alcohol

[Procon]

It's so sad to see how the father was trying to flee from the law. Hope stringent sections are applied.

[am1m]

Originally Posted by Formula1

What are the possible cases that can be charged against a parent?

This is what I was wondering about too. Obviously there is parental responsibility and accountability here, but legally, what is the charge? I read that in the case of a vehicle owned by someone but driven by a minor, the owner is liable. But apart from that, I'm not sure.

Originally Posted by Elegant

It is the duty of the parent to ensure that their kid is kept away from influential stuff like alcohol.

Duty it may be, but legally, is the parent liable if the minor kid goes somewhere and drinks?

Am obviously not trying to excuse the criminal responsible for the accident here, or his parent, I'd love to see justice done and both liable to the fullest extent of the law (though I wouldn't hold my breath, already MLAs are getting involved, this will just be yet another case of the influential wealthy getting off with as good as no punishment!). But legally, I'm just trying to understand what the parental liability here is.

I've done enough idiotic things as a minor and my family was blissfully unaware. By the grace of god, or luck, no serious or lasting consequences, but I don't expect them to be responsible for any of those idiotic things.

[AMG Power]

Originally Posted by am1m

legally, what is the charge?

Pune police have charged the boy's father under sections 75 and 77 of the Juvenile Justice Act. These sections pertain to willful neglect of a child and providing intoxicating substances to a minor, respectively.

Link

[ohaak]

Originally Posted by AMG Power

Link

The case against the father might not have significant impact. It seems to be a strategy to shift as much blame onto the father as possible. Notably, the aspect of alcohol is being downplayed, with medical reports indicating the teenager was not drunk.

If the teenager were tried as an adult, the situation would be different. While a 17-year-old might exhibit immaturity, they are not entirely under parental control in today's context.

A more pressing issue is the easy availability of alcohol. In Tamil Nadu, drugs are becoming increasingly accessible, with a ruling government minister recently implicated. Addressing the root problem requires educating children about the dangers of addiction through real-world exposure and awareness programs.

[MyLife_MyCar]

Originally Posted by MT_Hyderabad

Even the reporters are smoking something in this case. Excerpt from HT attached.

Haha, they missed the decimal point.


For someone who can easily spend ₹48,000/- on alcohol, wonder why they couldn’t afford ₹1,758/- pending fee for car registration!

[Formula1]

Doesn't the Juvenile Justice Act have anything on "endangering a child"?
Logically, charging the driver (a poor soul, I'm sure) so would make more sense in court than stuff like "willful neglect" and "providing alcohol" on the father.

I don't want it to happen, but just making the case that this is all hogwash from the police, owing to the election.

Such scenarios make a case for blood money, towards the victims and the society, because otherwise the repercussions are minimal anyway.

[Vinod_nair]

If this chappie was in the Gulf, next Friday he would be in the gallows.

[GTE]

Originally Posted by Vinod_nair

If this chappie was in the Gulf, next Friday he would be in the gallows.

Unless he was 'connected' the middle east is not too different.

[NomadSK]

Originally Posted by Vinod_nair

If this chappie was in the Gulf, next Friday he would be in the gallows.

If this chappie was in the Gulf, 99% he wouldn’t have dared to do such a thing. Problem in India is, laws are in place, but their implementation is next to zero on ground level and unfortunately with money it can be easily bought or twisted. I was thinking, what are the moral values of the judge when he gives bail and how he can have a peaceful sleep at night. Strange!

Originally Posted by GTE

Unless he was 'connected' the middle east is not too different.

True, it’s worse if you are connected, also here there's a concept of "Blood money", which is covered under your car insurance, so technically they have defined the cost of one's life. Which I'm not sure whether it's fair or not but in case it's truly an "accident" that can be your savior.

[Earthroamer]

Originally Posted by antz.bin

Watched the footage again.

No helmets as I had initially predicted. No need for me to go foot in mouth.

People refuse to wear helmets.
People keep dying.

This is the real story that never ends and never changes. Sadly nobody even makes a movie about it.

Needless to say this would be the exact reason the lawyers of the defendant use it against the plaintiffs as the reason for the extreme outcome. It doesn't matter how much drama media creates, the kid/father sentence is going to reduce for the aforementioned reason. These things happen on daily basis in our country. And almost all the cases come to a monetary settlement outside the court with police and lawyers being mediators.

Originally Posted by antz.bin

They may or may not have survived given the Speed of the car. But why not give yourself the extra chance to survive? Isn't that what we do when we wear seatbelts or buy a car with n number of airbags? Improve our chances of survival? The car didn't need to be at 100 for them to die without a helmet on. Anybody who has hit their head into a pole while walking carelessly at 5 kmph knows how much it hurts.

Just ask yourself and remain true to your heart. Would the backlash been as bad had the 2 victims been badly injured but still alive? What are we looking for? The perpetrator getting punished or people not dying? Which is higher priority? For me the answer is clear.

People here and elsewhere are emotional about this case because of the "300 word essay", "pizza in the police station", and "granting bail on Sunday". That gained traction on social media and mainstream media and people are expressing their angst to fit in the drama. No one should be absolved for their negligent driving. Poor or rich. A poor drunk auto wallah killing a rich guy on an expensive sports bike should be persecuted under the law. Emotions of the general public shouldn't matter.

[vdi]

Originally Posted by satya_ip

Whenever such incidents in which high profile ones are involved happens, I feel that our media and journalists do not dare to ask direct questions to the concerned authorities.

Forget about this case, is any main stream journalist in the country asking questions relevant to the citizens?

[Doonite]

I have been to Cannaught Place (Delhi) pubs and bars many times with my friends and everytime we have been asked to show our ID's and sometimes partially denied any alcohol because my friends didn't meet the age criteria (sometimes the cutoff was 21 and sometimes 23, i don't remember now). Since, I met the cutoff, they always watched over our table to see if I was letting my friend's drink and would not serve anymore to me if I let my friends consume those drinks (even a single sip!).

I guess stupid money and resources help when you show up at a club etc.

At that time, it obviously used to annoy us a lot but in hindsight, these pubs which enforce rules diligently should be praised for their stance.

I understand that the human life is irreplaceable and any kind of compensation can never equate to the loss of our beloved. I hope the victim's families get maximum justice for this murder and not another case of someone with power and influence getting away. I hope the family finds strength to get through this horrible ordeal and may the departed rest in peace.