The Gujarat High Court has granted regular bail to Hitesh Patel, the man accused of causing a fatal hit-and-run accident in Gandhinagar in July this year. The incident resulted in the deaths of two individuals after Patel's SUV struck a total of five people.
Medical Condition at the Heart of the Defense
While seeking bail, Patel's legal counsel presented a key argument centered on his medical history. The defense submitted that Hitesh Patel is a known patient of epilepsy and was suffering from an attack at the precise time of the tragic accident. Medical evidence on record was cited to support this claim.
His lawyer further stated that Patel had sustained severe head injuries in the past, which necessitated the surgical insertion of a plate in his skull. The defense contended that the investigating officer had not adequately examined this crucial medical aspect of the case.
Prosecution's Argument and Bail Conditions
The government lawyer strongly opposed the bail application. The prosecution argued that Patel was driving his vehicle on a service road at a speed of 83 km per hour, which was deemed excessively high for such a road. It was further submitted that available records indicated Patel had a habit of driving at excessive speeds.
After hearing arguments from both sides, the High Court granted conditional bail. The court imposed a total of nine strict conditions on the accused. One of the most significant conditions explicitly states, "He shall not drive any vehicle in future," effectively imposing a lifelong driving ban.
Case Background and Charges
Hitesh Patel was arrested by the Info City police station for reckless driving. The accident claimed the lives of two persons: Nitin Vasa and Hansa Vaghela. The police investigation revealed that Patel was in a hurry at the time because he had to attend court proceedings for another matter.
He has been charged under Section 105 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) for culpable homicide not amounting to murder. In its order, the High Court noted that it considered the case record, the nature and gravity of the allegations, the availability of the accused for trial, and his attributed role before deciding to grant bail.
The court concluded that based on this comprehensive consideration, the bail application deserved to be allowed.
