Because of the car’s abrupt braking, the bus driver’s carelessness, and the motorcycle rider’s failure to keep a safe distance, the Supreme Court of India decided that the car driver, bus driver, and motorcycle rider shared 50%, 30%, and 20% of the blame, respectively.
Based on a real Supreme Court ruling from 2025, this story reveals how a young engineering student lost his leg in a tragic highway accident, leading to a complex legal battle over negligence and compensation.
How Did the Accident Happen?
It began as a typical day on a busy highway, but a young man’s life was forever altered by an impulsive choice. On a congested Indian highway, the sun pounded down on cars as they sped by in a haze of metal and movement.
A 20-year-old engineering student, halfway through his third year at a Coimbatore college, was riding his motorcycle. Full of dreams and confidence — maybe a little reckless — he weaved through traffic without a valid license.
A car sped past him. Its driver was preoccupied with something personal. Behind him, a bus loomed large, its driver possibly too close for comfort. Everything changed in an instant.
The driver applied the brakes forcefully. His pregnant and ailing wife needed him to stop. In the middle of a highway where speed was the norm, there was no warning, no signal — just a sudden stop.
Too close to react, the young motorcyclist collided with the car. The bus behind him, unable to stop in time, hit him next. It was a disastrous chain-reaction collision. During treatment, the student’s left leg had to be amputated from the waist down due to crushing. His entire world changed at the age of twenty.
What Legal Steps Did the Young Man Take?
Devastated but determined, the young man pursued justice. He submitted a claim to the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT), a court that handles compensation for traffic accidents. He requested Rs. 11.6 crore, representing the life he could have had as an engineer but was now irrevocably changed.
The Tribunal reviewed the evidence:
The motorcyclist’s errors
The bus’s delayed braking
The car’s abrupt stop
Because the young man failed to maintain a safe distance from the car, as required by Road Regulation Rules 1989, the Tribunal calculated compensation of Rs. 91.62 lakh but deducted 20% for his contributory negligence. He was left with Rs. 73.29 lakh, which the bus’s insurer was required to pay. The car’s insurer was completely released.
Why Were Both Parties Dissatisfied with the Tribunal’s Decision?
The bus’s insurance company believed the amount was excessive. The young man felt the 20% fault assigned to him unfairly reduced his compensation. Both parties filed High Court appeals.
The High Court reassessed the evidence:
The car driver was held 40% liable, as his abrupt stop started the series of events.
The bus driver and motorcyclist each bore 30% liability.
With attendant charges cut from Rs. 18 lakh to Rs. 5 lakh, the compensation was slashed to Rs. 58.53 lakh. The young man remained dissatisfied, still adjusting to his new reality. He challenged the decision in the Supreme Court of India.
How Did the Supreme Court Determine Liability?
The Supreme Court faced a critical question: How should blame — and compensation — be equitably distributed in a catastrophic highway accident?
The Court examined:
Negligence: Failure to act with reasonable care causing harm
Contributory negligence: Shared responsibility lowering the victim’s compensation
Rules of the road: Particularly Rule 23 of the Road Regulation Rules 1989, mandating safe distance
Findings:
The car driver was 50% liable — sudden braking without signal was reckless
The bus driver was 30% liable — following too closely
The motorcyclist was 20% liable — failing to maintain a safe distance and riding without a license
This apportionment reflected the underlying cause and ensured fairness to all parties.
How Was Compensation Calculated?
The Supreme Court considered:
Potential income: Engineering graduates earn at least Rs. 20,000 per month. With 40% future growth, total loss was calculated at Rs. 60.48 lakh.
Attendant charges: Rs. 18 lakh for lifetime assistance, restored from the High Court’s reduction.
Loss of marital prospects: Increased to Rs. 5 lakh.
Medical and prosthetic expenses: Included in the final award.
The Court ensured a more equitable total, reflecting the victim’s pain, suffering, and permanent disability.
What Does This Case Teach About Negligence in India?
Shared Liability: Multiple negligent parties can share responsibility.
Safe Distance Rule: Drivers must maintain sufficient space to avoid collisions.
Contributory Negligence: Victims may bear partial responsibility, reducing compensation.
Multiplier Method: Courts calculate long-term financial loss using age, income, and future prospects.
Highway Safety: Abrupt braking and reckless driving can cause life-altering consequences.
FAQs
Q1: When a sudden brake causes a highway accident, who is at fault?
A: Liability is shared based on negligence. In this case, the car driver 50%, bus driver 30%, and motorcyclist 20%.
Q2: What is contributory negligence?
A: When a victim is partially at fault, compensation is reduced proportionally.
Q3: How is compensation calculated in India for accidents?
A: Under the Motor Vehicles Act 1988, courts use the multiplier method, factoring in age, income, future prospects, and medical costs.
Q4: What does Rule 23 of the Road Regulation Rules 1989 state?
A: Drivers must maintain a safe distance from the vehicle ahead to avoid collisions.
Q5: Can a driver stop abruptly on a highway?
A: Only if necessary and with proper signaling; otherwise, it may be deemed negligent.
Disclaimer
This blog is for public awareness only and does not constitute legal advice.
About the Author
Jehangir Badar, Advocate High Court, is a corporate lawyer and founder of VerdictTales. This case underscores how a single highway moment can change lives, and the importance of understanding Indian accident and compensation law.
