Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(RCT) 120
RAILWAY CLAIM TRIBUNAL - DELHI
Mr. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA, CJ, Mr. MUKESH NIGAM, J
SH SONU – Appellant
Versus
UNION OF INDIA THROUGH GENERAL MANAGER – Respondent
OA (II u)/DLI/280/2024
Smt. Ashima Sood, counsel for the applicant. Ms. Jatinder Kaur, counsel for the respondent.
Injuries sustained by an RPF Constable while on duty chasing a suspect are classified as an untoward incident, entitling him to compensation under the Railway Claims Tribunal Act.
Headnote:(A) Railway Claims Tribunal Act - Section 16 - Claim for compensation due to injuries sustained while on duty as RPF Constable - Injuries resulted from an untoward incident while chasing a suspect - Respondent admitted the applicant's status as a bonafide passenger and the incident as an untoward incident. (Paras 1, 4, 7)
(B) Compensation - Amount of Rs. 4,00,000/- awarded for amputation below the knee as per Entry No. 20 of the Railway Accidents and Untoward Incidents (Compensation) Rules, 1990 - Interest at 9% from the date of incident till the date of order. (Paras 6, 7)
(C) Disbursement of compensation - Directions for disbursal in a manner protecting the claimant's interests, including annuities or fixed deposits. (Paras 10, 11)
Facts of the case:
The applicant, while on duty, suffered a traumatic left leg amputation after being pushed by a suspect he was pursuing. The incident occurred on 16th May 2022 at Sarai Rohilla railway station.
Findings of Court:
The Tribunal found that the applicant was a bonafide passenger and entitled to compensation for injuries sustained during an untoward incident.
Issues: The main issues were the extent of injuries suffered by the applicant and the amount of compensation entitled.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the applicant's injuries fell under the definition of an untoward incident, and the compensation was determined based on the applicable rules.
Result: Claim application allowed.
JUDGMENT
Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia, Chairman (Oral) :-
1. Sonu, the applicant, has preferred the present claim application under Section 16 of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, praying that for injuries suffered by him during the course of performing duty, compensation be awarded. It is the case of the applicant that on 16th May 2022, he was posted at Sarai Rohilla railway station as RPF Constable and at 1:45 PM, he found that one person had deboarded from the train and started walking briskly. Meanwhile, while performing his duty as RPF Constable at the platform, Sonu, applicant, (hereinafter called ‘injured’) heard the noise of ‘thief thief’, he found that the person who was walking briskly, boarded the train and injured applicant chased him in order to nab him. When he went near the suspect, he gave a push to the applicant as a result of which he fell and suffered the crush injury resulting into traumatic left leg amputation.
2. Notice of the claim application was issued. The respondent filed Written Statement along with the report of DRM. In the Written Statement in the Preliminary Objections, it was admitted that the applicant, being Constable, of Railway Protection Force was on duty and at the time of incident, applicant indeed suffered injury during the course of his duty. It will be apposite here to reproduce Paras 2 and 3 of the Preliminary Objections:-
“2. That during the preliminary enquiry it came on record that the applicant/claimant was on duty at the time of incident and suffered injuries when he tried to catch the suspect of theft of passenger belongings and he was pushed by the suspect, as such he fell down and suffered amputation below left knee. In this regard an FIR U/S 307 IPC has been registered against the suspect and he was arrested by the police.
3. That further it came on record that on 16.05.2022 at about 14.10 hrs. one unknown person informed the station master Kishan Ganj that near to Delhi Kishan Ganj station one RPF Staff suffered foot amputation with train No. 04438 and the station master informed the same to SS/DDE and by calling ambulance the injured was sent to Central Hospital, however, train manager of train no. 004438, in the enquiry stated that he was not aware about the incident.” (Reproduced in Verbatim)
3. On 23rd December 2024, the Tribunal after hearing counsel for the applicant, Smt. Ashima Sood and Ms. Jatinder Kaur, counsel for the respondent, passed the following order:-
Ms. Jatinder Kaur, counsel for the respondent has drawn attention to the conclusion drawn in the report of DRM report exhibit R-1. The said conclusion reads as under:-
On the basis of the above conclusion drawn in the statutory report of DRM exhibit R-1, Ms. Jatinder Kuar has very fairly admitted that since the applicant was on duty being an RPF official and had suffered injuries while chasing a thief, the applicant will fall within the definition of ‘passenger’ and the injuries suffered by him shall also fall within the definition of ‘untoward incident’ as defined under the Act.
Ms. Jatinder Kuar has prayed that in view of the very fair stand taken by the respondent, payment of interest on decretal amount from today onwards be kept in abeyance.
Smt. Ashima Sood has no objection to the above prayer made by counsel for the respondent.
Granting due sanctity to the broad consensus arrived at between counsel for the parties, no issue is framed regarding the status of the injured as a bonafide passenger and sufferance of injuries by him in an untoward incident. (Emphasis supplied)
The following issues are formulated for adjudication:-
1. To what extent the applicant has suffered injuries in the present case?
2. To what amount of compensation if any the applicant is entitled to recovery his compensation from the respondent?
3. Relief if any?
As agreed by counsel for the parties, from today onwards, the payment of interest shall be kept in abeyance .
List on 09.01.2025.
4. It has been fairly admitted by the respondent that since the injur
