Hyderabad horror: 9 years after deadly crash, victim's kin say accused has fled abroad
Tired of too many ads? go ad free now
In his email, also marked to the Hyderabad police commissioner, Ramya's father Venkata Ramana wrote: "We are deeply alarmed by the fact that Vineeth, who played a pivotal role in enabling the accident, is absconding, and as per our information, has travelled abroad. The court records show a non-bailable warrant (NBW) is pending against Vineeth."
Accident that shook Hyd
The accident took place at Nagarjuna Circle on July 1, 2016 when a car driven by two youngsters, allegedly after drinking at a pub in Banjara Hills, hit the median, flipped and fell on the hatchback being driven by Ramya's uncle, P Rajesh.
Ramya, Rajesh and her grandfather Madhusudhana Chary died in the accident. The family was returning to their home in Borabanda after picking Ramya up from her school in Secunderabad.
The accident sent shockwaves across the city.Three people - R Shravil, Kancha Vishnu Vineeth and Subhajit Bhattacharya - were named accused by Banjara Hills police in the case. Shravil was accused of driving the car that belonged to Vineeth, allegedly under the influence of alcohol, with the latter seated inside.
Subhajit, the representative of Thank God Its Friday (TGIF), a pub in Banjara Hills where the two allegedly consumed liquor, was accused of serving alcohol to under-aged Shravil who was 20 years old at that time.
One accused discharged
Banjara Hills police charged Shravil and Vineeth under Sections 304 II (culpable homicide not amounting to murder) and 326 (voluntarily causing hurt) of the IPC in the chargesheet filed in Nov 2016.
Tired of too many ads? go ad free now
But in 2022, Vineeth approached the Nampally court and obtained relief. It discharged him from the charges of 304 II and 326 of the IPC.
"The learned prosecution did not give any reply regarding the rulings replied upon by the counsel of the petitioner (Vineeth). Admittedly, there is no material on record to show that the petitioner has intentionally aided or abetted the commission of offence in the above case voluntarily.
Therefore, in these circumstances, it is held that the petitioner has made out proper case forming the grounds for discharging him from the charges of offences under Sections 304 II, 326 of IPC and his entitled to be discharged from the offences," the additional metropolitan sessions judge said in the order.
The only charge standing against Vineeth was violating the Motor Vehicle (MV) Act.
A few months ago, the judge directed him to appear before the court. But he did not attend the court proceeding. In April 2025, the court issued a NBW against him. In the same month, during one of the hearings, Banjara Hills police returned the NBW as his whereabouts were allegedly not known. The matter is coming up for hearing again on July 8.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Indian Express
20 minutes ago
- Indian Express
Pune cop battling cancer gets his job back, was acquitted twice in ‘unaccounted cash' case
Battling cancer for nearly three years, assistant police inspector Giridhar Yadav is back in service and is overwhelmed to wear his uniform again while performing his duty at the control room of the Pune city police. Dismissed from service in 2018, the 50-year-old Yadav won a long legal battle to get back his police job while undergoing treatment for cancer. Yadav was acquitted, then convicted, and again acquitted by courts in Pune in a 2015 case related to 'unaccounted cash' of Rs 96 lakh belonging to Vasan Eye Care, a Chennai-based healthcare group, which has in the past faced Enforcement Directorate (ED) probe for forex violations. As Yadav's dismissal was not revoked even after his acquittal in the case for the second time, he filed an application before the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal (MAT) seeking an order that he should be reinstated. The Indian Express had reported the case on May 1, 2025. On June 18, the Pune city police passed an order to reinstate Yadav and police constable Ganesh More, who too was dismissed along with him. Yadav said he joined duty on June 26 and is deployed as the control room officer (CRO) in the premises of Pune city police commissionerate. 'I got my uniform and respect back,' said Yadav. As per case records, on November 4, 2015, Yadav and constable Ganesh More, both then attached to the Hadapsar police station in Pune city, found a huge cash (several bundles of Rs 1,000 and Rs 500 notes) in a car near the Gandharva lodge in Manjari area. Yadav issued summons to car driver Vishal Dhende, asking him to produce details of the source of this money. Yadav said the cash was seized as per legal procedure and taken to the police station. A panchanama (property search and seizure form) was prepared, which was signed by Dhende and two panch witnesses Avinash Deokar and Ravindra Mane. Around 7.30pm on the same day, based on Dhende's complaint, an FIR was lodged against Yadav, constable More and the two 'panch witnesses' for allegedly robbing the cash of Vasan Eye Care. All four were arrested under Indian Penal Code (IPC) Sections 392 and 34. According to the FIR, officials of Vasan Eye Care told the police that the cash was meant for 'salary and Diwali bonus' of their company staff. But the accused (Yadav) allegedly looted the cash (Rs 96 lakh) by threatening to frame the car driver in a case of possessing sharp weapons, said the FIR. The police team 'investigating' the case claimed to have recovered Rs 15 lakh from Yadav's house, Rs 70 lakh from Deokar, Rs 10 lakh from Mane and Rs 50,000 from More. The seized cash was returned to Vasan Eye Care, while Yadav and More were suspended from service. On February 18, 2017, judicial magistrate first class (JMFC) Y P Pujari in Pune acquitted all four accused in the case. During the trial, the defence lawyer Sangram Kolhatkar told the court that as per the statement of a police officer who had registered the FIR, the cash that investigators claimed to have recovered from the accused, was in the police station at the time of lodging of the FIR. Following the acquittal, Yadav and More's suspension was revoked. Soon they joined police duty. But on September 4, 2018, additional sessions judge A S Bhaisare set the JMFC court's order aside and convicted them along with other two accused in this case, granting them three years of rigorous imprisonment. Subsequently, Yadav and More were dismissed from service. Yadav challenged the conviction in the Bombay High Court (HC). On April 4, 2024, the high court ordered a retrial of the case. Accordingly, the case was then tried before additional sessions judge Ajit Mare. On September 26, 2024, Judge Mare passed a judgment acquitting Yadav and other three accused, stating, 'There is no record to establish the source of money' and that 'no report of the Income-Tax department about the same was ever placed.' Judge Mare also ordered Vasan Eye Care to deposit Rs 95,90,000 with 12 per cent interest per annum with chief judicial magistrate (CJM), Pune. Mare directed the CJM to conduct an inquiry about the disposal of this 'unaccounted money.' When contacted, a witness who had deposed before the court as a Vasan Eye Care official, said the company was taken over by 'ASG Eye Hospitals' in 2023, following approval from the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT). In 2017, the NCLT had slapped a corporate insolvency resolution process against Vasan Eye Care, which failed to repay debts of over Rs 2,000 crore to several creditors. Meanwhile, Yadav was diagnosed with lung cancer about three years ago. 'I took advanced treatment for cancer at the Tata Hospital in Mumbai. My health is improving. There is some weakness. But I am happy to adorn the uniform again. I will have to do medical check ups at regular intervals. But I manage to perform my eight hours daily duty at the control room properly,' he said. Yadav is residing in Pune with his wife and two daughters. Chandan Haygunde is an assistant editor with The Indian Express with 15 + years of experience in covering issues related to Crime, Courts, National Security and Human Rights. He has been associated with The Indian Express since 2007. Chandan has done investigative reporting on incidents of terrorism, left wing extremism, espionage cases, wildlife crimes, narcotics racket, cyber crimes and sensational murder cases in Pune and other parts of Maharashtra. While working on the 'Centre for Science and Environment (CSE) Fellowship on Tigers, Tiger Habitats and Conservation' in 2012, he reported extensively on the illegal activities in the Sahyadri Tiger Reserve in Maharashtra. He has done in-depth reporting on the cases related to the Koregaon Bhima violence in Pune and hearings of the 'Koregaon Bhima Commission of Inquiry'. ... Read More
Time of India
3 hours ago
- Time of India
BJP leader's son challenges life term in Rishikesh resort murder in HC
Dehradun: The high court on Monday took up the appeal of Pulkit Arya, son of former BJP functionary Vinod Arya and prime accused in the Rishikesh resort murder case, who challenged the life sentence awarded by a Kotdwar court on May 30 for killing a 19-year-old receptionist in Sept 2022. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now The division bench also sought records from the lower court and fixed Nov 18 for the next hearing. Arya, was convicted along with resort manager Saurabh Bhaskar and assistant manager Ankit Gupta. Kotdwar ADJ Reena Negi sentenced all three to life imprisonment under IPC sections 302 (murder), 201 (destruction of evidence) and the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act. Arya was also convicted under section 354-A (sexual harassment). The court imposed fines of Rs 62,000 on Arya and Rs 52,000 each on Bhaskar and Gupta. Arya is lodged in Almora jail, while Ankit is in Dehradun and Saurabh in Tehri prisons. The case triggered massive protests across Uttarakhand after the receptionist went missing in Sept 2022. Her body was fished out of the Chilla canal days later. She had worked at the resort that is owned by Arya for less than a month. A special investigation team analysed digital evidence, witness accounts and Arya's movements to establish the timeline. The state bulldozed the resort soon after the incident amid public outrage. The victim, who hailed from Pauri district, had been working at the resort for around 20 days when Arya, Bhaskar and Gupta allegedly pushed her into the Chilla barrage after she refused to provide 'special service' to a VIP guest.
Pink Villa
3 hours ago
- Pink Villa
Kim Soo Hyun Prevention Act: Press Ethics Committee warned 25 media outlets for reportage on it amid Kim Sae Ron dating row
The Kim Soo Hyun-Kim Sae Ron dating scandal escalated to the extent of a petition being filed to change to the current statutory s*xual crime laws of South Korea. Since the act was proposed following allegations of the actor being s*xually involved with an underage Kim Sae Ron, it was called the Kim Soo Hyun Prevention Act. However, noting the potential damage it could cause the actor, a warning was issued against the usage of his name for reportage. Media outlets asked not to use Kim Soo Hyun's name in reportage of petition for amendment of s*xual crime laws 25 media outlets covering the Kim Soo Hyun Prevention Act faced warning from the Korea Press Ethics Commission during their 997th meeting, as reported by K-media SBS Entertainment News on July 7. The Act aimed at raising the age of statutory r*pe for minors. The commission noted that using Kim Soo Hyun's real name in the article headlines could stigmatize him as a cr*minal, potentially causing emotional and mental harm to him, his family and fans. What laws did journalists breach while covering the Kim Soo Hyun Prevention Act? As per, the Korea Press Ethics Commission to the 25 media outlets faced the cautionary notice for breaching journalistic ethics. The outlets were found guilty of violating Article 10 (Principles of Titles) and Article 11 (Respect for Honor and Credit) by using titles that linked actor Kim Soo Hyun to unverified allegations. An example of a headline that was flagged as unethical by the commission is– "Kim Soo Hyun's grooming sexual crime against Kim Sae Ron, who was a minor, was revealed and angered the public." They emphasized that responsible journalism requires verifying claims before publishing them, especially when reporting on such sensitive topics. By failing to do so, the media houses compromised their responsibility to report accurately and fairly. The commission explained that 'citing the petitioner's one-sided claims as they are or using the bill title with Kim Soo Hyun's real name as the title of the article, raises concern that it may stigmatize the individual as a criminal when facts have not been confirmed.' This incident highlighted the importance of adhering to press ethics guidelines to prevent harm to individuals and communities.
