Back
2016 Supreme(Jhk) 1106
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
RAVI NATH VERMA, J.
Sri Muneshwar Tiwary & Anr. - Appellants
Versus
The Union of India represented by General Manager, East Central Railway Hazipur - Respondent
M.A. No. 408 of 2013
Decided On : 12-07-2016
For the Appellants : M/s Basav Chatterjee, A.K. Singh, Rajiv R. Chakravorty
For the Respondent: M/s V.K. Sinha, ASC, Railway, S.K. Lala
The judgment established the principle that in the event of a passenger's death, there is a presumption that the person traveling in the train had a valid ticket, unless this presumption is rebutted by the Railway through cogent and trustworthy evidence.
Headnote:
Railway Accident - Compensation - Railways Act, 1989, Section 123, Section 124-A
Fact of the Case:
The deceased fell down between the platform and a train, resulting in his death. The Railway Claims Tribunal dismissed the claim application, stating that it was not a case of an untoward incident as defined under Section 123 of the Railways Act, 1989.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that the incident fell within the purview of an untoward incident as per Section 124-A of the Railways Act, and the claimants were entitled to compensation.
Issues: (I) Whether the deceased was a bona fide passenger? (II) Whether the incident qualified as an untoward incident under Section 123 of the Railways Act, 1989? (III) Whether the claimants were entitled to compensation?
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that the burden to prove that the deceased was not a bona fide passenger lay with the Railway, and there was a presumption that a passenger traveling in a train holds a valid ticket unless rebutted by cogent and trustworthy evidence.
Final Decision: The Misc. Appeal was allowed, and the Railway was directed to pay compensation of Rs. 4,00,000 to the claimants.
R.N. Verma, J.
The claimants/appellants have preferred this appeal against the judgment dated 23.08.2013 passed by Railway Claims Tribunal, Ranchi in case no. OA(iiU)/RNC/2010/0104 old no OU-70028/07, whereby and whereunder the claim application filed by the claimants has been dismissed.
2. The brief facts, as it appears from the record is that Sunil Kumar (since deceased) son of the present claimants/appellants while boarding the train no. 9306, Sipra Express at Dhanbad fell down accidentally between the gap of platform and the train. His body was crushed under the wheels of the said train. resulting in his instantaneous death. In connection with the said untoward incident, the G.R.P. Dhanbad registered U.D. Case no. 18 of 2006. Thereafter, Rail Thana P.S. case no. 18 of 2006 dated 16.07.2006 was also instituted on the basis of the statement of one Rabindra Nath Dubey that he received telephonic call from the Dhanbad Railway Station in the mid-night on 15/16.07.2006 that his brother-in-law, Sunil Kumar died due to fall from train. Immediately, he rushed to Dhanbad railway station and received the dead-body of his brother-in-law, who was aged about 22 years. It is also stated in the FIR that his brother-in-law had come to Dhanbad from Deoghar and during his boarding in Sipra Express he fell down and crushed under the wheels of the train. It further appears from report submitted by Assistant Sub-Inspector, Railway Police, Dhanbad dated 16.07.2006 (R-5) that from the pocket of the deceased Sunil Kumar, one Identity Card and a ticket smeared with blood were recovered. It further appears from a report (R-2) submitted to DRM that the said untoward incident took place at Dhanbad Railway Station on 15.07.2006 whereafter an inquiry was conducted by the RPF. The report reveals that the alleged victim had fallen down at Dhanbad platform no.2 from 9306 UP Sipra Express while he was boarding the train. The victim died on the spot since he was run over. But in this report, recovery of any ticket particular has not been accepted. The said report was accepted by the DRM. Therefore, there is no dispute about the death of the deceased or untoward incident.
3. The respondent-Union of India, through General Manager East Central Railway, Hazipur in his written statement pleaded that no such accident took place on 15.07.2006, which would appear from the station diary. Therefore, claimants have to put strict proof that the deceased was traveling with a valid ticket.
4. Learned Claims Tribunal after examining the pleading of both the parties and the documents available on record and considering the submissions of the counsels framed the following issues :
(I) Whether the deceased Sunil Kumar, S/o Muneshswar Tiwary was a bona fide passenger ?
(II) Whether any untoward incident as defined under Section 123)(c)(2) of the Railways Act, 1989 occurred to the Sunil Kumar, S/o Muneshwar Tiwary while travelling in trail no. 9306 UP Sipra Express on 15.07.2006 ?
(III) Whether the applicants are entitled for the compensation as claimed and other relief, if any ?
5. Learned court below after considering all the issues and documents on record held that this is not a case of untoward incident as defined under Section 123 of the Railways Act, 1989. Hence, the claimants will not be entitled for any compensation, and the claim application was dismissed as indicated above.
6. Learned counsel appearing for the claimants assailing the impugned judgment as bad in law and perverse , seriously contended that from the report submitted by the Assistant Sub-Inspector, Railway Police Station, Dhanbad, it is apparent that a mutilated blood stained ticket was recovered from the pocket of the deceased along with his identity card but the court below failed to consider the said report (R-5) in the right perspective. It was also submitted that the onus to prove that the deceased was travellilng without ticket lies upon the respondent, but the court below has wrongly shifted the b
