Maharashtra: Cops book Anahita for rash, negligent driving

MUMBAI: Renowned gynaecologist Anahita Pandole, driver of the Mercedes Benz SUV that met with an accident on the Mumbai-Ahmedabad national highway in Palghar district which left former Tata Sons chairman Cyrus Mistry and his friend Jehangir Pandole dead two months ago, was on Saturday booked by Kasa police for multiple driving offences, including causing deaths due to negligence, rash driving, overspeeding, overtaking, not following lane disciple and ignoring duties of a driver.
Dr Anahita Pandole (55), admitted to H N Reliance Hospital, is yet to give her statement to the police. Her husband Darius Pandole (60), the sole eyewitness, gave his statement to the police on November 1, in which he said his wife was unable to merge into the second lane near the old Surya river bridge at Charoti in Dahanu taluka.

The carmaker's Pune office submitted its final report to the police on Friday. It corroborated its initial findings of error of judgement by Anahita when the car reached the bridge that narrows from three to two lanes.
Palghar superintendent of police Balasaheb Patil said the case against Dr Anahita Pandole for causing the deaths of former Tata group chairman Cyrus Mistry and Jehangir Pandole by flouting driving rules has been registered based on her husband Darius's statement and final reports by various agencies. An accidental death case was filed after the September 4 tragedy. Patil said the driver might have panicked and what followed caused the accident. Anahita's statement will be taken after her doctors give the go-ahead, said Patil said. She is still in hospital.
According to the final Mercedes Benz report, Anahita activated the anti-lock brake system (ABS) five seconds before the accident. However, it took 1.5 seconds before the speed of the car dropped from 100kmph to 89kmph. The accident site at Charoti bridge is not a black spot. Anahita and the other occupants were returning to Mumbai from Udvada in Gujarat.
Patil said the car was moving in the third lane, which is meant for heavy vehicles. "Light vehicles are expected to use the first lane. Her husband has also said his wife was in the third lane," said Patil. In the absence of CCTVs on the highway, it is not known when she got on to the third lane, but the police believe the driver may have been overtaking from the third lane, meant for heavy vehicles.
When the driver neared the bridge that turned into two lanes, she tried to get on to the second, which was occupied by a heavy vehicle (in a two-lane road, the second is for heavy vehicles). She might have tried to overtake the heavy vehicle by getting onto the first lane but there was a vehicle on the first ahead of her, Patil said. RTO officials also submitted their final report to the police that blamed the driver for the accident. No faults were found in the car.