Kochi City Police have booked a serving Additional District and Sessions Judge after his 17-year-old son allegedly drove the family's Mercedes-Benz into a scooter in the early hours of Sunday, killing the rider on the spot.
The judge, who serves at the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal in Irinjalakuda in Thrissur district, has been arraigned as an accused in his capacity as the registered owner of the car, in a case that has stirred public anger, protests and judicial scrutiny in Kerala.
The crash occurred at around 2.20 am on Sunday, October 25, on Container Road near Maraparambu in Cheranalloor, on the outskirts of Kochi. According to police, the Mercedes-Benz was travelling from Vallarpadam towards Kalamassery when it rammed a two-wheeler from behind near a Ford showroom. The scooter rider, Jayabalakrishnan, 55, died instantly. He ran a wayside eatery at Chittur and was returning home after closing his shop for the night when the speeding car struck him.
The teenager behind the wheel was apprehended by locals and handed over to the police. Cheranalloor police initially registered a case against the minor under Sections 281 and 106(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, covering rash driving and causing death by negligence. He was granted station bail under the Juvenile Justice Act and released, a decision that immediately drew criticism from the victim's family and youth organisations.
Police later added Section 105 of the BNS, dealing with culpable homicide not amounting to murder, to the charges, and the minor was produced before the Juvenile Justice Board, which released him on bail. Following protests, he was taken back into custody.
The case took a significant turn on Monday, when Kochi City Police booked the judge himself under Section 199A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. The provision fixes liability on the guardian or registered owner of a vehicle when a juvenile commits a motor vehicle offence using it, on the presumption that the owner or guardian is responsible, subject to statutory exceptions.
Police said the judge is the registered owner of the Mercedes-Benz involved in the accident, and a report has been submitted to the court.
Kochi City Police Commissioner S. Kaliraj Mahesh Kumar confirmed the action, saying the police were following the prescribed procedures for initiating proceedings against a serving judicial officer. He said formal steps, including obtaining the permission of the Kerala High Court and intimating the District Judge, were under way.
The investigation has since been transferred to the District Crime Branch, and the Kerala High Court has sought the case details along with a report on the judge's role in the matter.
Preliminary investigation has painted a troubling picture of the events leading up to the crash. Police said early evidence indicated the car was travelling at more than 100 kmph, and investigators recovered footage from the teenager's mobile phone showing the car at high speed shortly before the accident.
Police also said the boy had taken the car out late at night to shoot a social media reel, that he was a regular driver of the vehicle despite having no driving licence, and that he did not appear to be intoxicated at the time of the crash.
The victim's family has demanded firm action, including the arrest of both the boy and his father and the suspension of the judge. Jayabalakrishnan, described by those who knew him as the sole breadwinner for his wife and three children, ran a small roadside eatery and was a familiar face in the area.
His death, and the perception that the initial police response was soft, brought political workers and youth organisations onto the streets, with protesters insisting that the law must apply equally regardless of the accused's family connections.
The case has revived a wider debate in India about underage driving, parental responsibility and the enforcement of road safety laws. Section 199A of the Motor Vehicles Act was introduced precisely to close the gap that once allowed vehicle owners to escape accountability when minors drove their vehicles.
Under the provision, a guardian or owner can face prosecution and punishment, including imprisonment of up to three years, a fine of Rs 25,000 and cancellation of the vehicle's registration. Legal experts note that the provision is meant to deter parents from handing over vehicles to children who are not legally entitled to drive, a practice that remains common despite repeated warnings.
At the same time, the case raises sensitive questions about procedure. Action against a serving judicial officer cannot be taken casually: it requires careful adherence to guidelines laid down by the Supreme Court, intimation to the higher judiciary, and respect for the independence of the judiciary.
Police have stressed that they are following those procedures step by step, and the High Court's decision to call for the case papers signals that the judiciary itself is keeping a close watch on how the matter proceeds.
For the family of Jayabalakrishnan, however, the legal intricacies matter less than the loss they have suffered. Their demand is simple: accountability for a death on the road that they believe could have been prevented. The coming days will show whether the investigation, now with the Crime Branch, delivers that accountability, and whether the courts treat the case as a test of whether India's road safety laws apply with equal force to the powerful and the ordinary.
The tragedy also serves as a grim reminder of the dangers on India's roads late at night, when high speeds, empty stretches and young, unlicensed drivers can combine with devastating effect. A man returning home from work, a teenager out filming a reel, and a luxury car travelling at three figures — their collision has now become a case that Kerala, and the country, will be watching closely.
There is a particular irony in where the accused judge serves. The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal is the forum where victims of road accidents and their families seek compensation for death and injury on the roads. It is a court that deals daily with the human cost of rash and negligent driving, and its orders determine whether bereaved families receive financial support after losing a breadwinner.
That a judicial officer from such a tribunal now stands accused under the very law meant to fix responsibility for accidents caused by minors has not gone unnoticed in legal circles, and it is one reason the case has attracted attention far beyond Kochi.
What happens next will unfold on two tracks. On one, the Crime Branch investigation will establish the full sequence of events, including the speed of the car, the circumstances in which the minor took it out, and whether anyone else facilitated the late-night drive. On the other, the courts will decide the fate of both the minor, through the juvenile justice system, and his father, under the Motor Vehicles Act.
For Jayabalakrishnan's family, the hope is that both tracks lead to the same destination: a clear finding of responsibility for a death that, in their view, should never have happened.
(Reporting based on Bar and Bench and Onmanorama.)