Railway administration's strict liability applies for untoward incidents without considering fault.

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI ---

For the Appellants(s) : Mr. Manish Kumar, Advocate For the Resp/Railways : Mr. Abhijeet Kumar Singh, C.G.C.

Mr. Shashank Kumar, Advocate ----

2/11.06.2025 Heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicants/

appellants as well as the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent Railways.

2. This appeal has been preferred against the judgment dated 31.01.2024 passed by the learned Railway Claims Tribunal, Ranchi Bench, Ranchi in the case being Case No.OA(IIU)/40/2023.

3. Learned counsel for the applicants/ appellants submits that the learned Railway Claims Tribunal has wrongly rejected the claim of the appellants herein. He submits that the deceased namely Aryan Munda started his journey from Khalari Railway Station to Bhurkunda Railway Station by Train No.18614 Chopan-Ranchi Express Train. He submits that the deceased obtained railway journey ticket from Khalari Railway Station booking counter, bearing no.URG 36996170 dated 06.11.2022. He further submits that in course of journey there was a heavy rush of passengers in the whole general bogie of the said train and anyhow he entered in the said train and when the train reached near Bhurkunda Station, in the meantime, deceased Aryan Munda tried to get down but fallen down accidentally due to rush of passengers and jostling and got serious injuries and died on the spot near Bhurkunda Railway Station and in view of that, a UD Case was also registered by the father and mother of the deceased and have filed the claim which has been rejected by the learned Railway Claims Tribunal. He submits that valid ticket was found from the body of the deceased, however, on a wrong premise, the learned Tribunal has rejected the same. He further submits that the documents such as the Fardbeyan, Inquest Report and the Police Report clearly suggest that the accident took place due to fall from the train and inspite of that, the learned Tribunal has rejected the claim on the wrong premise. On this ground, he submits that the said order may kindly be set aside.

4. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent Railways opposes the prayer and submits that the learned Tribunal has appreciated the case in its right direction and has rightly passed the order. He submits that the learned Tribunal has rightly held that the accident occurred and there is no eye-witness to the said incident. According to him, the learned Tribunal’s finding is correct that at the time of accident there has no scheduled stoppage at Bhurkunda Railway Station and on the date of incident on 06.11.2022 said train through- passed Bhurkunda Railway Station at 15.25 hours. He submits in view of that the learned Tribunal has rightly passed the order. He submits that the home village of the deceased was near Bhurkunda Railway Station and the stoppage of that train was not there and in view of that the story of purchasing the railway ticket is also not correct.

5. From the records, which has been received by this Court, it transpires that the deceased Aryan Munda started his journey from Khalari Railway Station to Bhurkunda Railway Station by Train No.18614 Chopan-Ranchi Express Train. The deceased has obtained railway journey ticket from Khalari Railway Station booking counter, bearing No.URG 36996170 dated 06.11.2022 and due to heavy rush and jostling the deceased fell down from the train and due to that the accident took place. Fourteen exhibits have been brought on record. Exhibit-R/1 is inquiry report of the railway authority. The train signal report book is on the record and in the report of the Operation Department the reason of occurrence is said to be death due to fall from the train no.18614 Down Express