Deaths caused by targeted actions in a vehicular context do not qualify as accidents under the Motor Vehicles Act.

1. This appeal by the claimant is directed against the award of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT), West Tripura, Agartala, wherein the petition filed by the claimantappellant was dismissed on the ground that the death of the deceased did not arise out of the use of a motor vehicle accident.

2. The claimant, who is the son of the deceased, filed the claim petition alleging that his mother had died in an occurrence arising out of a use of motor vehicle and therefore, he is entitled to compensation. The relevant averments made in the claim petition are as follows: -
' 23. On the date and time of the accident, i.e. on 26-6-2000 at about 10/10.30 a.m. the deceased Shanti Laxmi Jamatia was travelling by the vehicle bearing registration No. TRS - 761 (Bus). When the said bus reached between Icharbil Bus Stoppage and Karailong Sishu Bihar School Bus Stoppage on Teliamura - Khowai road under Teliamura Police Station, some Bengali extremists stopped the said bus and pulled out her forcibly from the bus which was coming from Khowai for going to Agartala and killed her mercilessly. Thereafter the deceased Shanti Laxmi Jamatia was shifted to Teliamura Hospital where she was declared dead by the Doctor of Teliamura Hospital. The accident occurred due to the negligent driving by the driver of the said vehicle. At the time of said accident, the situation of Teliamura was very bad due to the communal dispute between the Tribal and Bengali people. The driver of the vehicle drove the vehicle without proper security, care and negligently.'

3. The allegations made in the claim petition were that when the deceased was travelling in the bus, some Bengali extremists stopped the bus, pulled out the passengers from the bus and killed them mercilessly. The other part of the allegation is that the driver of the vehicle was negligent inasmuch as he went into an area without any escort where there was communal strike. The claimants along with the petition filed under S.166 of the Motor Vehicles Act also filed a petition under S.140 of the for grant of interim compensation. The Tribunal allowed the application and awarded compensation under S.140 of the Act. The insurance company filed an appeal against the said award granting interim compensation under S.140 of the . A learned Single Judge of the Gauhati High Court (Agartala Bench) allowed the appeal of the insurance company on 30th August, 2004 and held that the death did not arise from an accident arising out of the use of the bus in question. The relevant observations are in Paras 7 and 8 of the Judgments, which read as follows: -
' 7. In Muralidhar Sarangi v. The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. , AIR 2000 SC 934 , where two trucks of the insured were set to fire in Assam by Bodo terrorists and one of the drivers of the trucks was also killed, the Apex court held that the risk arising out of ' mutiny' and ' terrorists Acts' was not covered under the insurance policy. The Apex Court further held that the trucks were destroyed by acts of terrorism and a driver of the truck was also shot dead and, as such, the Insurance Company could not be held liable for the loss suffered by the insured at the hands of Bodo activities who completely destroyed his trucks by setting them on fire and by killing one of the drivers. In the light of the aforesaid decision, there can be no doubt that, in the instant case also, the death of the deceased caused by some miscreants outside the bus cannot be and is not one of those risks, which was covered b