IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Misc. Appeal No.176 of 2024 ------

1. Zaidur Rahman, S/o Imam Hasen, father of deceased Parbej Alam

2. Mrs. Manwara Bibi, mother of deceased Parbej Alam

3. Ms. Halema Khatun D/o Zaidur Rahman, sister of deceased Parbej Alam

4. Tabrej Alam s/o Zaidur Rahman, brother of deceased Parbej Alam Appellant No. 4 is minor and represented through its natural guardian, mother Mrs. Manwara Bibi, r/o of Vill- Harihara, P.O.

Shrikund, P.S. Barharwa, Dist.- Sahebganj.

... .... …. Appellants Versus Union of India through the General Manager, Eastern Railway, 3, Koilaghat Street, P.O. /P.S. -Garden Reach, Kolkata, District Kolkata (West Bengal)

.... .... .... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY For the Appellants : Mr. Rajesh Kumar Jha, Advocate For the Respondent-UOI : Mr. Ravi Prakash, C.G.C.

------

Order No.04 / Dated : 10.12.2025 Appellants are in appeal against the order dated 15.09.2023 passed by Railway Claims Tribunal, Ranchi in OA(IIU)/RNC/40/2021 by which the claim application for compensation on account of death of Parbej Alam in railway accident, has been dismissed.

2. As per the case of the appellants, the deceased-Parbej Alam, was returning from Howrah on 25.02.2019 by Train No. 13023 UP Howrah- Gaya Express train. During the said journey due to sudden jerk, he accidently fell down from the running train near Gumani Railway station and died on the spot.

3. The G.R.P, Barharwa lodged U.D. Case No. 04/2019 on 26.02.2019 and after enquiry, final report was submitted stating that the deceased died due to an accidental fall from the train.

4. Altogether two witnesses have been examined on behalf of applicants as AW1 and AW2 and relevant documents including the Fardbeyan of AW-1, Japti Suchi, Station Memo, Fardbeyan of Mojibur Rahman, Inquest Report, and other documents were proved and marked as exhibits.

5. The respondent railways have also examined one witness as RW1 and produce DRM’s statutory investigation report along with other documents.

6. Learned Tribunal dismissed the claim application mainly on the ground that the deceased was not a bona-fide passenger on the basis of ticket recovered and applicants have failed to prove any accidental fall from the named train.

7. It is argued by learned counsel for the appellants that in order to entitle the claimants for compensation, the only requirement is that the deceased died in an ‘untoward incident’ involving a train and that he was a bona-fide passenger at the time of accident. Learned Tribunal has not discussed the evidence, which was brought on record either oral or documentary and dismissed the claim of the applicants. Further in (2019) 3 SCC 572 (Union of India Vs. Rina Devi) it was held that recovery of a railway ticket is not a sine qua non to prove that the deceased was a bona-fide passenger.

8. Learned counsel for the Railways has defended the impugned order and submitted that the claimants were not a direct eye witness to the incidence and therefore, the claim case has been rightly dismissed by the Tribunal.

9. Having considered the submissions advanced on behalf of both sides, I come to the conclusion that both the witnesses AW-1 and AW-2 have consistently stated in their deposition that the deceased had a valid ticket at the time of incident. Further on perusal of the inquest report, seizure list, it is stated that a ticket being ticket no. 26728923 was recovered from the dead body of the deceased, copy of the said journey ticket Ext. A11 was also produced on behalf the applicants. No contrary evidence has been produced on behalf of Respondent- Railways. Therefore, it is proved that the deceased was a bona-fide passenger travelling with a valid Railway ticket.

10. The deceased died in a Railway accident is amply proved by the final report submitted under Section 174 Cr.P.C., after inquiry in the U.D. Case, wherein it has been stated that the deceased fell down from the running train near Gumani Railway Station. The inquest