Court sets aside Railway Claims Tribunal order, holds accidental fall from train was an untoward incident and negligence is no defence under Section 124A of the Railways Act
The Calcutta High Court has allowed an appeal filed by the family of a deceased passenger and directed the Railways to pay compensation of Rs. 4 lakh with 6% annual interest, holding that the death resulted from an “untoward incident” under the Railways Act, 1989.
Justice Biswaroop Chowdhury set aside the Railway Claims Tribunal’s order dated January 3, 2020, which had dismissed the claim on the ground that the journey ticket recovered from the deceased was for the “UP” direction, while the accident involved a “DN” train. The Tribunal had concluded that the deceased was not a bona fide passenger and therefore not entitled to compensation.
According to the claimants, Sarful SK boarded a local train from Sealdah to Sargachi on July 8, 2015. They stated that when the train reached Sargachi station the next morning, he was forced to get down in heavy rush and jerking, accidentally fell onto the track, and was run over, resulting in his death. A police report, post-mortem report, surathal report, and railway enquiry report were all placed before the court.
The High Court noted that the police and railway records consistently showed that the deceased had accidentally fallen from the train. It observed that railway compensation claims are not strictly adversarial in nature and that the Railways Act is a beneficial legislation, which must receive a liberal interpretation.
Relying on Supreme Court precedents, including Union of India v. Rina Devi and Union of India v. Prabhakaran Vijaya Kumar, the court held that mere non-recovery of the relevant ticket from the deceased is not enough to reject a compensation claim. It also held that negligence of the victim is not one of the statutory exceptions under Section 124A of the Railways Act, and therefore cannot be used as a defence where death occurs due to a fall from a train.
The court further observed that in such cases family members often have to depend on police and railway records, as they cannot be expected to produce eyewitnesses. It also took note of the fact that a ticket from the previous day had been recovered from the deceased’s possession, which supported the claim that he was a bona fide passenger.
Holding that the appellants had established that the death was caused by an untoward incident, the High Court directed the Railways to deposit Rs. 4 lakh along with interest at 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition until the date of payment.
Bottom Line:
Railways Act, 1989 - Claim for compensation for untoward incident - Mere absence of a ticket of the concerned train from possession of deceased is not by itself fatal to claim - If materials on record including police report, inquest/surathal report and railway enquiry show accidental fall from train, negligence of victim is no defence under Section 124A - Beneficial legislation must receive liberal interpretation and compensation is payable.
Statutory provision(s): Railways Act, 1989 Section 123(c)(2), Railways Act, 1989 Section 124A, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 Section 174, Railways Act, 1989 Section 2(29)
Sulochana Bibi v. Union of India, (Calcutta) : Law Finder Doc id # 2993230
