Scientist's speeding conviction quashed as mother revealed as driver

A young scientist has had a conviction quashed for speeding in her luxury Porsche after it was revealed her mother was the one driving.

Sadia Khanom, 28, had originally been ordered to pay £1,000 in fines and legal costs after failing to provide information when her Porsche Macan was snapped by a speed camera near her former university.

However, the case was reopened once it had been established that Khanom's mother F'Moni Ahmed, who runs a local Indian restaurant, had received the prosecution notice at their Cheshire family home and 'forgot' to pass on the details. 

Prosecutors accepted this explanation after Khanom informed them she had also been away for work at the time of the offence.

It is unlikely that Khanom's mother will face any charges as a result due to the time elapsed since last March's incident.

Khanom is a successful scientist who developed a 'revolutionary' disinfectant spray during the Covid-19 pandemic.

This business saw her make and distribute an electrically powered spray to tackle harmful pathogens which protects surfaces for up to two weeks.

Hailed as one of the biggest scientific breakthroughs of the pandemic, it was reported in 2021 that following product trials with NASA and the NHS that Khanom received £10 million worth of orders. 

The speeding investigation was initially opened last March when Khanom's seven-speed automatic Porsche was snapped by a speed camera on the A540 Parkgate Road near the University of Chester.

Following her failure to provide driver details, the scientist was handed down a £660 fine plus £354 in costs in addition to six penalty points being placed on her licence.

Speaking before Chester Magistrates' Court where a trial was set to begin this month, Khanom's solicitor Akef Akbar stated that the prosecuting Miss Val Tonkinson had agreed to withdraw charges.

Miss Tonkinson told the hearing: 'The defendant was not at the address at the time and was not driving the vehicle at the time of the speeding offence. She was not in the area at that time. She travels a lot for work.

'The person who drove intended to respond but forgot. She did not give the document to her daughter. I have no reason to doubt that. I have been provided with evidence of where the defendant was at the time.

'On that basis I will offer no evidence in respect of both offences'.

Following the hearing, Mr Akbar made a request for a ‘defendant’s costs order’ which was granted. That means her legal fees equivalent to legal aid rates will be paid from central funds.