Hyderabad:Nine years after a ghastly road accident led to the death of three people across three generations, including nine-year-old Ramya, family members of the girl have written to senior police officials raising concerns over the absence of an accused from court proceedings.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.”The accident took place at Nagarjuna Circle on July 1, 2016 when a speeding car driven by two youngsters, allegedly after drinking at a pub in Banjara Hills, hit the median, flipped to the other side of the road and fell on the hatchback being driven by Ramya’s uncle, P Rajesh. While he and Ramya died on the spot, her grandfather Madhusudhana Chary succumbed to his injuries days later.The family was returning to their home in Borabanda after picking Ramya up from her school in Secunderabad.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.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. 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 stated in the order. After a prolonged legal battle, the only charge still standing against Vineeth was that of violating the Motor Vehicle (MV) Act.Yet, a few months ago, the judge directed him to appear before the court, which wanted to initiate the process of “framing charges”. 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 and requested the court to issue a notice to the sureties of Vineeth. As per details available on the Nampally courts website, the NBW was still pending when the case came up for hearing on June 25.The matter is coming up for hearing again on Tuesday, July 8.“We request the deputy commissioner of police (west zone) to take action to challenge the session’s court order which set aside the prime charge of Section 304 II, in the appropriate appellate court. Otherwise, it will amount to injustice. We have been waiting for justice for the last nine years and I don’t know when there will be a closure. We request the police to actively pursue the matter,” Venkata Ramana told TOI on Sunday.The case under Section 304 II is still on against prime accused Shravil.
