21-yr-old taking part in bike rally dies in hit & run in Faridabad
Gurgaon: Ritik Maurya's joy of taking part in a bike event in Faridabad was short-lived.
A vehicle allegedly hit the 21-year-old's motorcycle, during the rally, near Bandhwari toll plaza on the Gurgaon to Faridabad stretch on Sunday.
Ritik, who originally hailed from Badaun (UP), succumbed to his injuries at a hospital.
The exact details remain "unclear", police said, adding, they are scanning CCTV footage from the nearby areas, as "there were none at the spot".
Ritik left home in Sector 70's Mujheri village at 6am to participate in the event. Investigating officer Surender Malik said, "Ritik was accompanied by a group of fellow riders. He was critically injured after a vehicle sideswiped his bike near Bandhwari toll."
Constable Malik said on Sunday, "Other riders rushed Ritik to Civil Hospital in Faridabad, where doctors declared him dead on arrival."
"The organiser of the bike rally — a KTM showroom — has not contacted the family yet. We want the company to be held responsible and necessary action should be taken against them," a cousin of the victim said.
The youngest among four brothers, Ritik, who worked at a private bank, had purchased the bike — in Jan — worth approximately Rs 2 lakh on EMI.
by Taboola
by Taboola
Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links
Promoted Links
Promoted Links
You May Like
5 Books Warren Buffett Wants You to Read In 2025
Blinkist: Warren Buffett's Reading List
Undo
Ritik's father, Kailash Maurya, said the family was informed of the accident around 8-8.30am by one of Ritik's friends who was riding with him. "By the time we reached the hospital, my son was already gone," he said.
Ritik's friend, who was trailing him during the ride, reportedly did not witness the accident. He arrived at the spot after a crowd had gathered and found Ritik's bike lying on the road.
"We don't know how the accident happened. We were called to the hospital and when we reached, we were told Ritik was no more," he said.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
41 minutes ago
- Time of India
Owner's risk no excuse: Punjab and Haryana high court holds railways liable for pilferage losses
Chandigarh: The Punjab and Haryana high court has held the railway department liable for compensating losses due to pilferage of iron consignments even when goods were booked at "owner's risk", clarifying that this classification does not absolve railways of liability if negligence is evident. Citing sections 79, 93, and 94 of the Railways Act, the court has emphasised the duty of the railways to account for consignments once they assume control, even if loaded at private sidings. "The refusal to allow re-weighment, a right under Section 79, was deemed a serious lapse," the court has held. Justice Pankaj Jain passed the order while deciding a 34-year-old matter in the appeals filed by the Steel Authority of India Limited and Indian Iron and Steel Company Limited, challenging the dismissal of their claim petitions by the Railway claims tribunal. The case dates back to the early 1990s, when the steel companies booked consignments of pig iron from Vishakhapatnam to Goraya, Jalandhar. Though the journey was expected to take 6–8 days, the wagons remained in transit for nearly a month. Suspecting pilferage, the consignees requested re-weighment of the goods. However, the request was repeatedly denied by the railway authorities. The companies engaged an independent surveyor, who confirmed significant shortages in the delivered material. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like 임플란트, 지금 시작하세요 [자세히 보기] 임플란트 더 알아보기 Undo However, the railway tribunal previously rejected their claims on technical grounds, including lack of proper authorisation to file claims and failure to establish service of statutory notices under section 106 of the Railways Act. In its detailed order released last week, Justice Jain held that the railway tribunal erred. The judge held that the regional manager legal, who filed the claim, was duly authorised under a valid board resolution. Further, the court observed that statutory notice was served and backed by affidavit, and no evidence was produced by the railways to refute it. The single bench was also of the view that the denial of re-weighment and failure to counter the surveyor's findings pointed to such negligence. Finally, the court ordered compensation for the claimants for the full extent of the losses suffered, with 7% interest per annum from the date of filing until actual payment. The cause of action arose in the early 1990s, with the case pending before the high court since 1993. MSID:: 121975080 413 |
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
2 coaches get jail terms for sexual assault on judo players
1 2 Meerut/Bareilly: Courts in Meerut and Moradabad sentenced two judo coaches to prison for sexually assaulting minor trainees, including a national-level judoka, in separate incidents that took place in 2017 and 2023. Manish alias Max, 26, received a life sentence for raping a 10-year-old national judo player in Meerut, special public prosecutor Kuldeep Mohan said. Additional district judge Sangeeta also imposed a fine of Rs 50,000 on him. Special public prosecutor Avkash Jain told TOI, "The convict violated the girl in the guard room while her brother and fellow players were asked to practise. After the crime, the minor bled profusely, and Max, in a cynical attempt to conceal his crime, staged a drama; he told the minor's parents that she sustained a severe injury during practice." Jain added, "Believing the convict's theory, the minor was rushed to a medical facility and underwent treatment in three different hospitals, and after eight days, she secretly wrote her ordeal on a paper, which somehow reached her father." In a separate case, special Pocso judge Ghanendra Kumar sentenced Mohd Qasim Ali, 46, to 15 years of rigorous imprisonment for sexually assaulting a 12-year-old boy in Moradabad. The convict was also fined Rs 60,000 and taken into judicial custody immediately after the court order. Additional district govt counsel Manoj Gupta said, "The incident occurred on Sept 9, 2017, when the boy was in his school where the convict was appointed as judo coach. Mohd Qasim took the boy to the forest on the pretext of judo training, where he forcefully sodomised him. The boy narrated his ordeal to his family upon returning home." Gupta added, "The submitted medical examination report to the court confirmed the assault. Additionally, the statement of the survivor and the circumstantial evidence helped in nailing the accused." The chargesheet was submitted in court, and the judge expedited the trial.
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
‘Interest on refund is like compensation in consumer disputes'
New Delhi: The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC), while holding builders liable for deficiency in service, observed that in consumer cases, awarding interest along with a refund serves as a form of compensation. The commission's bench of Justice Sudip Ahluwalia and Sadhna Shanker was hearing an appeal filed by a builder against the orders of a state commission. The state commission had found the builder's service deficient and directed a refund of Rs 34,27,747 with 12% interest, Rs 1 lakh as compensation, and Rs 11,000 as litigation costs to the complainant. On June 16, NCDRC modified the state commission's order based on legal precedents. It set aside the Rs 1 lakh compensation but increased the litigation costs from Rs 11,000 to Rs 40,000. In 2011, the complainants booked a flat in a project by Barnala Builders on the Chandigarh-Ambala Highway after seeing advertisements that claimed it was fully developed and clear of legal issues. They paid a large portion of the price, but the builder did not provide the buyer's agreement at first. Later, the builder gave them an agreement with many unexpected and unfair terms. The complainants also received several arbitrary service tax demands without a proper explanation. Despite paying over Rs 34 lakh, they were only given a paper possession letter, while actual development, utility connections, and statutory certificates were still missing. They asked for a refund, but the builder only threatened forfeiture. They filed a complaint before the state commission of Punjab in 2014. The commission in 2016 held that the builder had been deficient in service and ordered a refund of Rs 34,27,747 with 12% interest, Rs 1 lakh compensation, and Rs 11,000 as litigation costs. Aggrieved, the builder filed an appeal before the National Commission. The national commission reaffirmed that in consumer cases, giving interest and a refund is a kind of compensation.
