Motor Accident Claims Tribunal Awards Rs 27 Lakh Compensation in Tragic Teen Death Case
The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT) in Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar has delivered a significant verdict, awarding compensation of Rs 27,00,560 to the grieving parents of a 16-year-old girl who lost her life in a tragic road accident in 2019. The tribunal has placed sole responsibility for the fatal incident on a police sub-inspector, citing clear evidence of rash and negligent driving.
Details of the Tragic Accident and Legal Proceedings
According to official tribunal records, the devastating accident occurred on April 22, 2019, between 2:00 PM and 2:30 PM near Jama Masjid in the Town Hall area. The victim, Akefa Mahreen Mohammad Zaheer, was a bright Std XI science student with aspirations of becoming a medical doctor. She was riding her moped to attend tuition classes when a car allegedly driven by Police Sub-Inspector Santosh Pate collided with her two-wheeler from behind with considerable force.
The tribunal noted with concern that the police officer reportedly fled the scene immediately after the collision without offering any assistance to the critically injured teenager. Akefa sustained severe head injuries in the impact and tragically succumbed to her injuries two days later during medical treatment, cutting short a promising young life.
Legal Order and Compensation Details
The compensation order was formally passed on March 18 by N M Jamadar, Member of the MACT in Aurangabad. The claim petition had been filed by the victim's devastated parents, Shaikh Mohammad Zaheer Mohammad Azam and Naseem Begum, who were represented throughout the proceedings by their legal counsel F K Patel.
The tribunal has directed three parties to jointly and severally pay the awarded compensation amount: New India Assurance Company Limited (the insurance provider), vehicle owner Arun Pate, and driver Santosh Pate. The order specifies that the compensation must be paid along with 9% annual interest calculated from the date the claim petition was originally filed until the complete realization of the amount.
Investigation Controversies and Legal Challenges
The case involved significant investigation irregularities that drew judicial scrutiny. Initially, the First Information Report (FIR) had been registered against an unknown person, but subsequent developments raised serious questions about the integrity of the police investigation.
Following a criminal writ petition filed by the victim's father before the Aurangabad bench of the Bombay High Court, the court made critical observations suggesting that undue favor appeared to have been shown to the driver because of his position as a police officer. This judicial intervention led to a fresh investigation that ultimately resulted in the filing of a chargesheet against Sub-Inspector Santosh Pate.
Insurance Company's Defense and Tribunal's Rejection
During the tribunal hearings, the insurance company attempted to argue that the victim, being a minor, did not possess a valid driving license and therefore shared some responsibility for the accident through contributory negligence. However, the tribunal firmly rejected this argument in its final ruling.
The tribunal observed that the absence of a driving license could not absolve the car driver of liability, particularly when evidence clearly showed the driver had sufficient opportunity to avoid the collision entirely. The ruling emphasized that the accident occurred solely due to the rash and negligent driving of the car driver, with no shared responsibility attributable to the victim.
Final Verdict and Implementation Directives
In its conclusive judgment, the MACT ruled unequivocally in favor of the claimants, determining that the tragic accident resulted exclusively from the car driver's reckless and negligent operation of the vehicle. The tribunal has issued specific directives for the implementation of its order.
The respondents have been instructed to deposit the full awarded compensation amount through RTGS or NEFT electronic transfer directly into the claimants' bank account within the stipulated timeframe specified in the tribunal's order. This verdict represents not only financial compensation for the family's loss but also a judicial affirmation of accountability regardless of the perpetrator's official position.
