The court established the liability of the Railways under the 'Rule of Strict Liability' and emphasized the obligation to pay compensation for untoward incidents, regardless of fault.

1. The appeal is by Railways against the Judgment and Order dated 11-01-2010 passed by the Railways Claims Tribunal, Nagpur Bench, Nagpur in Claim Application No. 118/OA-II/RCT/NGP/2006 awarding compensation in the sum of Rs.4,00,000/- to the respondents. The question raised by the appellant/Union of India – Railways in this appeal is as to whether the Railway Tribunal was right to award the claim in favour of the dependents of deceased Bhagwan Tukdoji Vasane on the ground that he, while travelling as a bona fide passenger by Train No.1386 Up Nagpur-Bhusawal Passenger on 11.06.2005, met with an untoward incident covered under Section 123(c) of the Indian Railways Act, 1989. My answer is affirmative for the following reasons.

2. The facts are:-

On 11-06-2005, deceased Bhagwan had gone to Malkapur. He had taken a ticket from Malkapur to Bhusawal by Train No. 1386 Nagpur-Bhusawal Passenger. Due to sudden jerk in the heavy rush, he fell down at KM 493/3, in front of Wireman’s duty room of Malkapur Police station and died. The respondent no.1 herein had filed the Claim Application for compensation in respect of the alleged untoward incident. The Railways resisted the Claim on the ground that the deceased came from the offside of Platform no.1 and had committed suicide in front of the break Van by coming in front of the train and died. Alternatively, it was contended that the intending passenger must come to the Station at least 20 minutes before arrival of the train. The passenger shall not lean upon or open the carriage door or step down or enter in to carriage when train was in motion. The Railways, in the alternative, contended that the deceased died due to his own criminal act of negligence and the incident was not an untoward incident covered under Section 123 (c) or Section 124-A of the Indian Railways Act, 1989. The Railways also disputed that the respondent were dependent on the deceased. The Railways also disputed their liability on the ground that there was no legal evidence to establish that the deceased held valid railway ticket to travel by the train.

3. On behalf of the appellant, it is submitted that the Tribunal erred to pass the Award in favour of the respondent without legal proof of the untoward incident. The Railways had alleged that the deceased committed suicide in front of the train and was not the bona fide passenger in the train for claiming that he had accidental fall from the train due to heavy rush.

4. Reliance is placed upon the ruling in Union of India, South Central Railway, Secunderabad .vs. Kurukundu Balakrishnaiah, Done, Kumool District and Others reported in 2004 (1) ALT 100 (F.B.) to argue that if a person trying to board or alight from the train, or standing near the door, jump from the compartment, crossing the Railway tracks or leaning out of the compartment and felling down as a result and either injured and died, such person is not entitled to compensation under Section 124 –A of the Indian Railways Act. It is contended that the Tribunal, therefore, erroneously granted the claim.

5. Mr. K.S.Narwade, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents, who argued to oppose the above submissions, contended that the Tribunal had correctly granted the Award finding that the appellant did not prove that the deceased committed suicide, as alleged, despite the burden of proof upon the Railways. A valid railway ticket was recovered during the inquest panchnama indicating that the deceased was a bona fide passenger travelling by the train from Malkapur to Bhusawal. The timings were “tell a tale” circumstances that the deceased had fallen down due to heavy rush and immediately the train had stopped. The deceased had boarded the train at 14.01 hours. The train departed from Malkapur at about 14.03 hrs. The train stopped at 14-05 hrs.

6. I have seen the record and proceedings from the Tribunal. At this stage, it is relevant here to note Sections 2(29), 123, 124-A of the Indian Railways Act