This miscellaneous appeal under Section 23 of Railway Claims

Tribunal Act, 1987 has been filed against the award dated 24.06.2021

passed by Member, Railway Claims Tribunal, Bhopal in Case

No.OA/IIu/BPL/068/2019 by which the claim petition filed by the

appellants for grant of compensation has been rejected mainly on the

ground that the claim of the appellants is hit by Section 124-A of

Railways Act, 1989 and secondly, the deceased was not travelling with a

valid ticket.

Since the date of the incident and the death of the deceased are not

in dispute, therefore, the only questions for consideration are:

(i)

whether deceased Shambhu Prasad Tiwari was travelling with

a validly issued ticket or not?

(ii)

whether the claim is hit by Section 124-A of Railways Act,

1989?

(i) whether the deceased Shambhu Prasad Tiwar was travelling

with a validly issued railway ticket?

It is the case that when the deceased was trying to deboard a

moving train, he slipped on the platform, as a result, both of his legs

were badly damaged. Since the deceased was all alone, therefore, his

son was informed. A Roznamcha Sanha, A/1 was recorded by Sub-

3 S.A. No.2165/2021

Inspector, R.P.F. outpost Beohari on 26.06.2018. The said Roznamcha

Sanha reads as under:

jsYos lqj{kk cy

jkstukepk

eaMy JBP

Dt. 26/02/2018

ykbu@Fkkuk@pkSdh-SIPF/BEHR

rkjh[k

vkSj

le;

bUnzjkt

uEcj

lkj

fjiksVZ dk C;ksjk

gLrk{kj

21@40

07

jkokuxh ,ao

okilh gkLfiVy

C;kssgkjh

EkS iz/kku vkj-,u-ds-xkSre f’k¶V 8 to

20.00 Hrs. M;wVh ij rSukr Fkk nkSjkus

M~;wVh le; 20.00 cts T.NO. 11651

tcyiqj flaxjkSyh bUVjflVh ,Dlizs’k

[kM+h gksus okyh Fkh rHkh [kM+h gksus ls

igys ,d O;fDr mrjus dk iz;kl fd;k

rHkh ml O;fDr dk iSj vUnj pyk x;k

o ykbu IysVQkeZ ds chp uhps pyk x;k

ftlls nksuks iSj cqjh rjg ls t[eh gks

x, ftldks jsYos Mk- dks cqykdj izkFkfed

mipkj fd;k x;k ekSds ij s.s. C;ksgkjh

o iz-vkj- K.K. Sen SiB ls jkelsu gh

ik.Ms; ekStwn Fks ckn 108 ,Ecqysa’k

cqykdj lHkh ds lg;ksx ls ckgj ,Ecqysa’k

esa p<+ok;k x;k eS iz-vkj- ,u- ds- xkSre

o SiB ls jkelusgh ik.Ms; flfoy

vLirky ys tkdj bejtsUlh es On

duty Mk- fu’kku flag ifjgkj }kjk

mipkj fd;k x;k o rqjUr gh 108 xkM+h

ls lgMksy ds fy, jsQj dj fn;k x;k

?kk;y O;fDr viuk uke ’kEHkw izlkn

frokjh s/o Jh vej izlkn frokjh mez 67

o"kZ R/o fuoklh jrokj Fkkuk [kMqh ftyk

lh/kh e-iz- tks fd ukxiqj ls tcyiqj dh

fVdj ua- UFB 17629349 o tcyiqj ls

C;ksgkjh fVdV ua- ULA52918404 Fkk

?kk;y O;fDr ds crkusa ij mlds yM+ds

ds eksckby ua- 09373114174 ij mlds

4 S.A. No.2165/2021

yMds dks lwpuk nh xbZ vHkh ifjtu ugh

vk, Fks yM+ds dk uke larks"k frokjh gSA

ckn okil pkSdh vkdj [kSfj;r ntZ

fd;k o loZlacfU/kr dks lwpuk fn;k

fjiksVZ ntZ gSA

jkstukepk lR;kfir

4.

From the aforesaid document, it is clear that the ticket numbers

which the deceased was carrying are specifically mentioned. It is also

clear from the Roznamcha Sanha that the deceased was all alone and his

children were informed by mobile. Since the deceased was in a badly

injured shape and he was not accompanied by any of his family

members, therefore, it was not expected for the injured/deceased to keep

the tickets in a safe custody. Furthermore, from the Roznamcha Sanha,

it is clear that before writing the Roznamcha Sanha the injured/deceased

was sent to the hospital whereas the Roznamcha Sanha must have been

written in the police station/outpost. The manner in which the

Roznamcha Sanha has been written it is clear that at the time of writing

the Roznamcha Sanha, the Sub-Inspector, R.P.F. was in possession of

the tickets which the deceased was carrying with him. Thus, if the

claimants could not file the tickets before the Claims Tribunal, then no

adverse inference can be drawn against the claimants, even otherwise

the respondent has not disputed that the ticket numbers mentioned in the

Roznamcha Sanha were not issued at