Panaji Court Modifies Charges in Fatal Paragliding Incident, Discharges Company Owner from Severe Homicide Allegation
In a significant legal development in Panaji, a local court has discharged Shekhar Raizada, the proprietor of the adventure tourism company Hike n Fly, from the charge of culpable homicide not amounting to murder. The court, presided over by Additional Sessions Judge Artikumari Naik of the Fast Track Court-1 in Tiswadi, has instead altered the charge to causing death by a rash or negligent act not amounting to culpable homicide. This decision pertains to the tragic incident that occurred during a paragliding activity in Keri, Goa, in January of last year, which resulted in the deaths of two individuals.
Court Directs Accused to Appear Before JMFC Pernem
The court has directed Raizada, who resides in Paliem and is originally from Lucknow, to appear before the Judicial Magistrate First Class (JMFC) in Pernem on February 16. This step marks the continuation of legal proceedings under the revised charge, ensuring that the case remains active despite the discharge from the more severe allegation.
Prosecution's Case Highlights Alleged Negligence
According to the prosecution's case, Raizada is accused of knowingly allowing his paraglider pilot to conduct paragliding activities for tourists without obtaining the necessary permissions from the authorities. It is alleged that he operated these activities without providing any safety equipment, fully aware that such actions could endanger human lives. This alleged negligence led to the tragic deaths of tourist Shiwani Dable from Maharashtra and paragliding pilot Suman Nepali from Nepal, casting a shadow over the safety protocols in adventure tourism in Goa.
Legal Arguments and Court's Rationale
During the proceedings, Advocate Michael Nazareth, representing the accused, argued that there was no evidence to support the charge of culpable homicide not amounting to murder under Section 105 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS). He emphasized that this charge is severe and requires prima facie evidence of deliberate intent, which was lacking in this case. On the other hand, Public Prosecutor Coleman Rodrigues contended that there was sufficient evidence on record to frame a charge for a rash and negligent act under Section 106(1) of the BNS.
In her ruling, Judge Artikumari Naik stated, "I duly considered the arguments canvassed by both, and in my considered opinion, the charge deserved to be altered, and there could not be a complete discharge of the accused in the matter." She highlighted that the prosecution's reply and written synopsis conceded that there was no evidence of foul play based on the record. Instead, the case was characterized as one of sheer rash and negligent act on the part of the company for operating paragliding activities without the mandatory license from the tourism department.
Implications for Adventure Tourism and Legal Precedents
This ruling underscores the importance of adhering to safety regulations and obtaining proper licenses in the adventure tourism sector. It also sets a precedent for how similar cases might be handled in the future, balancing the need for accountability with the legal standards of evidence. The alteration of charges reflects a nuanced approach to justice, where the severity of the allegation is aligned with the proven facts of the case.
As the legal process moves forward, stakeholders in the tourism industry and legal experts will be closely watching the developments, particularly the upcoming hearing before the JMFC Pernem. This case serves as a reminder of the critical need for stringent safety measures to prevent such tragedies in the future.
