New Delhi – A Delhi court has granted bail to Gaganpreet Makkad, the accused driver in the Delhi BMW Incident at Dhaula Kuan, which claimed the life of 52-year-old Navjot Singh, an employee of the finance ministry, and left his wife Sandeep seriously injured. The court order, spanning 19 pages and delivered by judicial magistrate first class Ankit Garg, strongly criticised the role of paramedics who arrived at the accident scene but failed to provide assistance to the injured.
Court Dismisses Prosecution’s Core Argument
The prosecution had argued that Makkad’s actions after the accident constituted culpable homicide not amounting to murder under Section 105 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS). According to them, Makkad deliberately transported the injured to a hospital linked to relatives instead of the nearest medical facility, thereby making the offence non-bailable.
However, the court dismissed this claim, observing that CCTV footage directly contradicted the theory. The footage revealed that the BMW initially struck a road divider, overturned, and subsequently hit the two-wheeler carrying Navjot and his wife, which then collided with a Delhi Transport Corporation (DTC) bus. The bus did not stop after the crash, raising further concerns about accountability in the Delhi BMW Incident.
Ambulance Crew Under Harsh Judicial Scrutiny
The order highlighted the shocking conduct of paramedics who arrived in an ambulance seconds after the accident. The footage showed the vehicle stopping near the site, with a driver and paramedic rushing towards the scene. Within 40 seconds, however, they returned to their van without offering any meaningful assistance. The court noted that the paramedics neither checked Navjot’s pulse nor provided basic first aid.
Labeling their conduct as “highly unprofessional,” the court said the crew left hastily despite the victim lying unconscious beneath the overturned car. This failure, it said, played a significant role in worsening the tragedy of the Delhi BMW Incident.
Contradictory Testimonies
The prosecution claimed that Makkad had refused help from the ambulance. Yet, CCTV footage showed that Makkad’s wife was busy rescuing their children and her husband from the overturned car at that moment. This contradicted the paramedic’s version and cast doubt on their credibility. The court also observed that bystanders attempted to assist the injured by moving them aside, but the official ambulance team did not intervene.
Prosecution’s Argument on Medical Aid
The prosecution maintained that timely medical aid could have saved Navjot’s life. The court, however, questioned this assumption, pointing out the absence of medical records confirming his pulse or respiration immediately after the collision. Without such evidence, the court ruled, survival could not be conclusively proven in the Delhi BMW Incident.
Court Questions Hearse Van Claim
During the hearing, Additional Public Prosecutor Dishank Dhawan argued that the vehicle arriving at the scene was a hearse van without first-aid facilities. The court rejected this defense, noting that even in such circumstances, the van could have transported the victims to a hospital. This observation further strengthened the court’s criticism of the paramedics’ inaction.
Lack of Speed Evidence
Another central argument from the prosecution concerned the alleged speed of the BMW. The court observed that, despite the presence of speed cameras along the road, the prosecution failed to provide evidence of the vehicle’s speed. This omission weakened the claim that Makkad had the “knowledge” required to classify the act as culpable homicide. Instead, the court said the facts pointed more towards rash and negligent driving.
Bail Granted with Conditions
Considering the evidence, or lack thereof, the court granted bail to Makkad, stressing that the charges under Section 105 BNSS were not substantiated. The ruling effectively reclassified the incident from culpable homicide to an accident caused by negligent driving. However, the court made it clear that the trial will continue, and the conduct of both the ambulance crew and the prosecution will remain under scrutiny.
Broader Implications of the Delhi BMW Incident
The Delhi BMW Incident has reignited public debate on road safety, emergency medical response, and accountability. While bail has been granted, the case highlights the urgent need for reforms in paramedic training, enforcement of road laws, and use of technology in accident investigations.
As the trial progresses for Delhi BMW Incident, families of victims and concerned citizens will closely follow developments, hoping for justice and stronger systems to prevent similar tragedies. The Delhi BMW Incident stands as a reminder of how negligence on multiple fronts—driver behavior, emergency response, and official investigations—can turn a road accident into a devastating loss of life.
