The burden of proof lies on the appellants to establish the deceased's status as a bona fide passenger, and the absence of prima facie evidence prevents the shift of onus to the railways.

V.K. Shali, J.

1. This is an appeal filed by the appellants under Section 23 of the Railway Claims Tribunal against the judgment dated 9.4.2009 passed by the Chairman, Railway Claims Tribunal dismissing the petition of the appellants bearing No.OA (IIU) 79/2008 for grant of compensation.

2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that one Gurdeep Singh is purported to have died as a result of injuries sustained by him in an untoward railway accident on 7.1.2008 at about 11 a.m. at platform No.3, Sadar Bazar Railway Station. It was alleged that he was involved in this accident on account of being a bona fide passenger in EMU Train No.SNP-2. The appellant No.1, Geeta, is the widow, appellant Nos.2 & 3 are the children and appellant No.4 is the mother of the deceased. The respondent/UOI filed its written statement and contested the claim of the appellants that the deceased was neither a bona fide passenger in the train nor did he died because of an untoward incident which would entitle the appellants to any claim.

3. On the pleadings of the parties, following issues were framed :-

“1. Whether the applicants prove that they are the dependants of the deceased Sh. Gurdeep Singh within the meaning of Section 123 (b) of the Railways Act?

2. Whether the applicants further prove that the deceased was a bona fide passenger on the train in question on the relevant day?

3. Whether the applicants also prove that the death of the deceased had occurred as a result of an untoward incident as alleged in the claim application?

4. Whether the respondent proves that the petitioners/applicants have failed to prove any negligence on the part of the respondents in the claim application/petition?

5. To what order/relief?”

4. Both the parties were given opportunity to adduce their evidence. In support of their case, the appellants filed affidavit of Geeta, widow of the deceased as AW-1 and she proved documents exhibit AW 1/1 to AW 1/14. She has stated that the deceased, her husband, was a bona fide passenger. He was undertaking a train journey after purchasing ticket and because of the sudden jerk of the train, he fell down from the train because of which he suffered injuries and died. She was subjected to cross-examination and in her cross-examination, she admitted that she had not accompanied the deceased to the railway station nor did she saw the deceased purchasing the ticket. So far as the documents are concerned, these are the documents mostly which have been drawn by the police after the dead body of the deceased was spotted at the track. In these documents, it has been stated that dead body of a person was found on the track, who was reportedly travelling in a train and had perhaps fallen from it. In some documents, it is written that the deceased had suffered injuries because of the train accident but as to how he suffered those injuries is not mentioned.

5. The respondent did not adduce any evidence. So far as the Issue No.1 with regard to the appellants being dependants of the deceased is concerned, that was decided in their favour but so far as Issue Nos.2, 3 & 4 are concerned, the Tribunal decided against the appellants holding that there was no evidence which could show that the deceased was a bona fide passenger. The reason for arriving at this conclusion was that there was no direct evidence which could show that the deceased had boarded the train as a bona fide passenger as neither the ticket was recovered from his person nor there was any ocular evidence in this regard by way of testimony of either the widow or any other person. It was observed by the Tribunal that the documents which are sought to be relied upon by the appellants are only based on surmises and conjectures so far as the deceased being a bona fide passenger is concerned, which cannot be relied upon. The learned Tribunal also discounted the plea of the appellants that the burden of proof that the deceased was a bona fide passenger in the absence of ticket having been f