$~47 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + FAO 32/2026, CM APPL. 7620/2026 MANDEEP KUMAR .....Appellant Through: Mr. Rajan Sood, Ms. Ashima Sood and Ms. Megha Sood, Advocates.

versus UNION OF INDIA .....Respondent Through: Mr. Sandeep Tyagi, SPC for UOI.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR OHRI

O R D E R

% 04.02.2026 CM APPL. 7620/2026 (exemption)

1. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

2. The application is disposed of.

FAO 32/2026

1. The present appeal has been filed under Section 23 of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987, on behalf of the appellant/claimant seeking setting aside of the judgment dated 20.11.2025 passed by the Railway Claims Tribunal, Principal Bench, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the “Tribunal”) in Claim Application No. OA(IIu) 741/2025.

2. Vide the aforesaid judgment, the Tribunal dismissed the appellant’s claim for compensation in respect of the injuries sustained by the appellant.

3. The case of the appellant is that he was working as a Constable in the Railway Protection Force and was posted at Delhi. On 09.06.2024, he boarded Train No. 04432 to travel from Kishan Ganj to Delhi. At about

09:50 AM, while the train was near Pulbangash, the appellant accidentally fell from the train and sustained injuries to his right foot. With the assistance of persons present at the spot, he was initially taken to LNJP Hospital and was thereafter referred to Northern Railway Central Hospital. Subsequently, he was shifted to Med Star Hospital, Rohtak, where due to the severity of the injuries, a part of his crushed right foot had to be amputated. The appellant has sought compensation under Section 16 of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 for the injuries suffered by him in the said alleged untoward incident.

4. The Tribunal dismissed the claim primarily on the ground that the appellant failed to establish his status as a bonafide passenger and that the injuries sustained by him were not the result of an untoward incident.

5. Learned counsel for the appellant assailed the findings of the Tribunal by contending that the claim was dismissed primarily on the alleged absence of a journey ticket and speculative inferences drawn from the medical and documentary evidence. Learned counsel further submitted that the appellant had sufficiently discharged the initial burden of proving that he was a bona fide passenger, and that the evidence on record clearly establishes the sequence of events and shows that the injuries sustained by the appellant were the direct result of an accidental fall from the train.

6. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent defended the impugned judgment by submitting that the Tribunal correctly held that the Appellant failed to establish the occurrence of an untoward incident. It was contended that there were no eyewitnesses to the alleged fall, and no valid ticket found. Learned counsel further submitted that injuries suffered by the applicant were result of his own negligence, as he was standing at the door of a moving train.

7. I have heard the learned counsels for the parties and perused the material on record.

8. The appellant, examined as AW-1, stated in his evidence by way of affidavit that he is a Government servant working as a Constable in the RPF. On 09.06.2024, while performing his duty at the Old Delhi Railway Police Post, he came to Kishan Ganj Railway Station, where he purchased a valid railway ticket for Rs.10/- and boarded Train No. 04432. He deposed that there was a heavy rush inside the compartment, due to which he was compelled to stand near the gate. He further stated that when the train was about to reach Pulbangash, Delhi, he accidentally fell down from the running train and sustained serious and grievous injuries, besides the amputation of one foot. He further deposed that immediately after the accident, he was removed to LNJP Hospital, where his MLC was prepared, and thereafter he underwent further treatment at Medstar Hospital, Rohtak. The appellant asserted that the s