If a man is driving his car at a low speed and the driver of a speeding car collides with him, and the speeding driver dies, is it obligatory for him to fast?

The questioner : A questioner says: I was towing a broken-down car and we were moving at a low speed inside a military convoy. A man in a speeding car appeared and entered our lane. The driver of the car towing me swerved, and the speeding driver collided with my car and died. Is it obligatory for me to fast? I ask that the question be read, as I am confused.

The Shaykh : Who is at fault? It appears that the one at fault is this man who entered, because the road was yours and your driving was steady, while he came speeding. So it is he who killed himself, and you owe nothing of his blood money, nor is there any expiation upon you. In such matters, the questioner should, when asking, clarify the question completely for the scholar so that he does not fall into error. Many people think that a mere accident necessitates blood money and expiation, but that is not the case. Rather, one looks at who committed the transgression or negligence, and that person is liable. If there was no transgression or negligence, there is no liability. For example, a person is driving a car steadily, has checked his car, and knows there is no defect in it, but Allah decrees that a donkey strikes him and the car overturns, and those with him die; then he owes nothing. Likewise, if a man is walking normally and a pit appears that he did not know about, and he tries to swerve away from the pit so as not to fall into it, and he overturns and people die with him, there is no expiation or blood money upon him, because this action is seen as what? It is better and safer than falling into the pit. And Allah the Exalted said: Now, a man is driving a car and a pit appears, so he swerves away from it and overturns. He overturns onto a man on the sidewalk, and the man dies, and a man from the passengers with him dies. Is he liable for both men? Or is he not liable for either of the two men? Or is he liable for one of the two men and not the other? Yes, he is liable for the man on the sidewalk onto whom the car overturned, and he is not liable for the man who was a passenger in it. Why? Because the man who was a passenger in it, the driver acted in a way that he saw to be safer, so his action was for his benefit. As for the one on the sidewalk, he has no connection to the car; he has no connection to the car, and the car overturned onto him by the action of its owner, so he is liable for him. So the important thing is that these matters, matters of accidents, are delicate, and a person should investigate them thoroughly and present them to the scholar in a way that the matter is clearly clarified.