The main legal point established in the judgment is the liability of the Railway Administration for negligence in providing sufficient safeguards at level crossings, leading to compensation for the victims of railway accidents.

JUDGMENT :

V. Gopala Gowda, C.J. - The petitioners (1st petitioner is the mother and others are the younger brothers and sister of the deceased represented by mother-guardian-1st petitioner) have filed this writ petition for the death of the deceased Pradeep Naik who died on account of railway accident claiming compensation to the tune of Rs. 4 lakhs, which is the minimum liability of the Railway authority to a passenger as per Section 124 of the Railways Act, 1989, urging various facts and legal contentions.

2. The brief facts as stated in the petition is that on 13.8.2006 at about 6.30 P.M. while the deceased Pradeep Naik came to purchase the household articles to the nearby market situated in his village within 1/2 kilometer from his house by walking and at the time of crossing the railway line, the Sambalpur-Bhubaneswar Up Express dashed against him and dragged him to Bar No. 111/3-4, which is about 200 meters away from the place of accident as a result he died at the spot. Accordingly the younger brother of the deceased lodged an F.I.R. in the Hondapa Police Station as per Annexure-1. It is further stated that the railway line passes through the village Gundurimunda dividing the village in two parts crossing the busy Panchayat Road. The Road touches either side of the railway line and thousands of people are crossing the railway line every day for marketing, going to their work places and children use the road for going to school.

3. It is stated that the residents of the village were using the said road as their path and they have approached the Station Master on several occasions for installation of check gate and to appoint a guard to avoid danger and save the valuable lives of the persons and also domestic animals which are died while crossing due to the railway accident. Despite their request, no steps have been taken by the authorities due to their carelessness.

4. The railway line not only divides the village and the Panchayat Road but also the railway line has diversion at that spot for which passing of train cannot be seen from a distance of 200 metres due to residential houses on account of which many valuable lives of human beings and animals are lost. On account of the railway accident which have been taken place and in the instant case on account of not providing manned railway gate and posting of guard, the railway accident took place on 13.8.2006. Due to the death of the deceased, F.I.R. (Annexure-1) was lodged, on the basis of which an enquiry was conducted by the O.I.C., Hondapa P.S. and an U.D.G.R. Case no. 11/2006 was registered and report was submitted to the S.D.M., Athamallick. Post-mortem was conducted by the Medical Officer of Government Hospital, Hondapa who opined that the death was caused due to shock of external-internal hemorrhage due to grievous injuries on vital organs. From the report of the O.I.C., Hondapa P.S., it is revealed that the railway accident occurred due to negligence on the part of the railway authority, resulting in the death of the deceased. The copies of the report submitted by the O.I.C., Hondapa P.S. and the post-mortem report are annexed as Annexures 3 & 4 respectively.

5. It is the case of the petitioners that the death of the deceased Pradeep Naik was due to the accident caused on account of the negligence and carelessness on the part of the railway authorities as they have not paid any attention to install the check gate at the level crossing spot which is connected with the busy road and divides the village into two parts. The railway authorities failed to perform their statutory duties to save the valuable lives of the human beings and animals. Therefore, they are before this Court claiming compensation as the petitioners, the mother, brothers and sister of the deceased. It is further stated that they are fully dependant upon the income of the deceased as he was the only earning member of the family. It is further stated that the deceased was hale and healthy and energeti