Breaking news:
"Why Is He Running Away?" Milind Deora Questions Aaditya Thackeray's Refusal to Debate | Karnataka Congress Leader's Son Seen on CCTV Crushing Biker with SUV | India Successfully Tests First Long-Range Hypersonic Missile, Joins Exclusive Club | Netanyahu's Home Targeted by Flash Bombs a Month After Lebanon Drone Attack
Logo

Delhi Court Imposes INR 2 Crore Fine in Mercedes Hit-and-Run Case from 2016

In a significant ruling, the Tis Hazari Court fines a father for his minor son's fatal hit-and-run incident involving a Mercedes in Delhi eight years ago, highlighting negligence and legal consequences 

07-07-2024
image
   

In a significant verdict, the Tis Hazari Court has ruled on the infamous Mercedes hit-and-run case from eight years ago in the nation's capital. In 2016, a wealthy 17-year-old's reckless behavior in the Civil Lines area has now been met with justice. The MACT (Motor Accident Claims Tribunal) Court has imposed a fine of INR 2 crore on the minor's father. This amount will be given to the family of the 32-year-old marketing consultant who lost his life in the incident. The CCTV footage of this incident had gone viral at that time. The related criminal case is still ongoing, in which the minor's father and mother are also accused.

The father employed every tactic to save his son, including presenting another driver in place of his son, but this lie was exposed in court. In his order, MACT Court Judge Dr. Pankaj Sharma stated, "The father is trying to escape by pretending to be unaware of his minor son's actions. According to the facts, he was well aware of his son's previous traffic violations and the accident. He continued to ignore it. The father failed to realize that this could endanger the lives of others on the road. Manoj Agarwal, the father, deliberately encouraged his minor son's illegal behavior by ignoring it at the cost of other drivers."

Father's Tacit Consent in the Mercedes Hit-and-Run Case

Judge Pankaj Sharma further stated, "He failed to realize from his past actions that allowing his minor son to drive could be disastrous for other road users. Instead of preventing his minor son from driving the Mercedes, he chose to ignore it, which indicates his tacit consent. At the time of the accident, the father was at home, which should have been an even greater reason to prevent his son from taking the car out. Therefore, under the facts and circumstances, the petition seeking exemption from liability on the part of the father is dismissed."

Insurance Company to Recover the Money

The court clarified that the insurance company would initially have to pay the compensation amount of approximately INR 2 crore. Since the minor was illegally driving without a license, the company is entitled to recover this amount from the minor's father later. Judge Pankaj Sharma further directed, "The insurance company is instructed to deposit the aforementioned compensation amount into this tribunal's account within 30 days via NEFT or RTGS mode."

Image

Supreme Court Orders Immediate Enforcement of Stage 4 GRAP in Delhi-NCR to Ta

The Supreme Court has directed Delhi-NCR states to enforce Stage 4 pollution restrictions and addres

Read More
Image

Supreme Court to Rule on 'Bulldozer' Demolitions, Guidelines for Fair Action

The Supreme Court will announce its decision on creating nationwide guidelines to regulate

Read More
Image

Justice Khanna's Agenda as Chief Justice: Tackling Backlogs and Making Justic

Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna, sworn in on Monday, outlined a reform-focused vision emphasizing reduce

Read More