Once foundational facts of a train journey are established through verified records, the burden of proof shifts to the railway administration to prove statutory exceptions; delayed discovery of a body in isolated sections does not negate the presumption that the death occurred in an untoward incident.

JUDGMENT :

Manoj Kumar Ohri, J.

CM APPL. 31089/2022 (seeking condonation of delay of 7 days in filing the appeal)

1. By way of the present application, the appellant seeks condonation of delay of 7 days in filing the appeal.

2. For the reasons stated in the application, the application is allowed and the delay of 7 days in filing the appeal is condoned.

3. The application is disposed of accordingly.

FAO 193/2022

1. The present appeal has been filed under Section 23 of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987, against the judgment dated 08.03.2022, passed by the Railway Claims Tribunal, Principal Bench, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the “Tribunal”) in Claim Application No. OA/II(u)/DLI/283/2019.

2. Vide the impugned judgment, the Tribunal dismissed the claim application on the ground that the appellant was neither a bona fide passenger nor did the incident come within the ambit of an “untoward incident” as defined under the Railways Act, 189 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”).

3. The brief facts necessary for adjudication of the present appeal are that on 08.10.2018, one Rajendra (hereinafter referred to as the “deceased”) was travelling from Ballabhgarh to Delhi after purchasing a valid journey ticket. During the course of the said journey, he accidentally fell from the train near Okhla and sustained serious injuries on his head, as a result of which, he died on the spot.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the appellants submits that the Tribunal has discarded documentary evidence and that the contemporaneous railway and police records consistently establish recovery of a valid railway ticket from the person of the deceased and also records that the deceased had fallen while travelling from Ballabhgarh towards Delhi. He further submits that the journey ticket recovered from the deceased stood verified by the railway authorities themselves and, therefore, the finding that the deceased was not a bona fide passenger is entirely unsustainable. Reliance has been placed upon Union of India v. Rina Devi , (2019) 3 SCC 572, Union of India v. Prabhakaran Vijaya Kumar &Ors, (2008) 9 SCC 527. and Sh. Surendra Prasad Verma v. Union of India , (2014) SCC OnLine Del 2917.

5. On the contrary, learned counsel for the respondent supports the impugned judgment and submits that the exact train involved in the incident could not be identified and no eyewitness has stated having seen the deceased falling from the train. It is submitted that the body was noticed only subsequently and, therefore, possibility of track crossing cannot be ruled out.

6. This Court has heard learned counsels for the parties and perused the material placed on record.

7. Coming first to the manner of occurrence, the DD No.5A dated 09.10.2018 recorded at PS Hazrat Nizamuddin specifically notes that information was received regarding one person having fallen from a train near Okhla Railway Station towards Harkesh Nagar, presumed to be dead, lying near the railway track. The said DD entry further records that the information was transmitted for investigation to ASI Dal Chand. The inquest proceedings specifically record that an unknown dead body aged about 55 years was found near KM Pole No.1525/18 near Indra Camp, Okhla Railway Station. The report further records that there were substantial head injuries and bleeding.

8. The statement of one Chand, relied upon during inquiry proceedings, merely records that while travelling from Palwal towards Okhla, he noticed a crowd near the railway track and saw one person lying near the railway line whereafter he informed the police authorities. The witness nowhere stated th