This is an appeal preferred by the claimant-appellant against the order dated 27th September, 2010 passed by the Railway Claims Tribunal, Patna Bench in Claim Case No. OA00095 of 2000, dismissing the claim of the appellant.

2. This is an admitted case of the parties that dead-body of a male was found lying near railway track and adjacent to same one chit of paper containing the name of one Krishna Pratap Singh @ Nanhe Singh of village - Gopalpur, P.S - Baniyapur, District - Chapra and phone numbers - 87441/87854/74288, was also found kept beneath stone chips, whereon, the Assistant Station Master, Durondha, through memo, intimated the police officials, who instituted a case, investigated the matter and also contacted on the phone numbers, giving rise to arrival of the relatives out of whom, the parents are the claimants.

3. It is the case of the appellant that the deceased was travelling in a train bearing no. 5207 UP (Aamrapali Express) and fell down resulting into his death giving rise to filing of the claim case which was contested mainly on the ground of identity of the deceased and of being a bona fide railway passenger in absence of railway ticket and the Claim Tribunal accepting the objections dismissed the claim application.

4. It is contended on behalf of the appellant that it is the Railway Authorities, who found the dead-body lying near the railway track, came into action and they also found the said chit whereon the name, address and telephone numbers were written. No doubt, there is no reference of railway ticket in the inquest report prepared roughly after twenty four hours and during the period the body was lying alone or under the control of the Railway Authorities. On the other hand, it is contended on behalf of the respondent that as per the claimants, their deceased son was aged about 18 years, whereas, the age of the deceased in the inquest report as well as in the postmortem report has been given 35 years and there is no evidence to establish the deceased had a valid ticket, consequently, the Claim Tribunal has arrived at right conclusion. Hence, no interference is required.

5. On behalf of the claimants, there are total three witnesses. A.W. - 1 is the claimant no. - 1, the father of the deceased, who arrived on the information given by A.W. - 2, a relative and at the time of his arrival except Chowkidar there is none near the dead-body. It is true he is not a witness on purchasing of ticket, but A.W. - 3 has said to him that the deceased had purchased the ticket in his presence and this is what A.W. - 3 has said in his deposition and A.W. - 2, Vayas Singh, is the person, who got the information through P.C.O. on his phone about the accident and death of the deceased and arrived at the place. The statements of A.Ws. - 1 & 3 are prima facie sufficient to show that the deceased has purchased the ticket. More so, a Division Bench of this Court in Letters Patent Appeal between “Smt. Kaushalaya Devi & Ors. Vs. Union of India, Through General Manager, North Eastern Railway, Gorakhpur, U.P.” reported in “2008(3) PLJR 711” in paragraph – 5 of the judgment has clearly held:-

“5. Railways Act provides prosecution of persons entering Railway Stations without valid journey ticket or platform ticket. That makes its abundantly clear that without a ticket, either for undertaking a journey or for the purpose of visiting the platform, no one is entitle to be within the precincts of a Railway Station. That the person was in the precincts of the Railway Station would, therefore, logically have a presumption that he had a ticket for him. That he did not have a ticket was obligatory on the part of the Railway Administration to prove”.

And, likewise, in the said case in the instant matter also the Railway has not produced even a single witness or chit of paper to show that the deceased was a ticket less passenger. The inquest report also is silent about search of pockets etc. of the clothes weared by the deceased. Fu