The court established a principle of strict liability for railways in passenger incidents, emphasizing the absence of criminal intent as a basis for compensation under the Railways Act.

JUDGEMENT

1. This Claim Application is filed by the applicant u/s. 16 of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act , 1987 r/w. sec. 123 (c) (2) &sec. 124-A of the Railways Act , 1989 for compensation arising out of an alleged untoward incident occurred during the course of working Railway involving a death of deceased Abhinav Kumar Sidheshwar Jha. The factual matrix of the matter in nut-shell is as below:

2. It is stated that, Abhinav Kumar Sidheshwar Jha, (hereafter referred as deceased), aged 30 years, was resident of Samastipur. The Applicant No. 1 & 2 are parents of the deceased. On 19.08.2018 the deceased was travelling from Pune to Danapur Railway Station by local train. When the train was near Loni railway station he accidentally fell down from train. He succumbed to his injuries on 20.08.2018. The Applicant stated that the deceased was in possession of a second class Railway ticket from Pune to Danapur Railway Station. But it was lost in the untoward incident. It has been contented that the deceased was the bona-fide passenger and died in untoward incident occurred on 19.08.2018.

3. In response to notice,–Railway Authority appeared and opposed the claim application.The Respondent filed Written statement and also produced on record the DRM reports, accompanied with other relevant police papers marked as “R-1”. It has been alleged that as per the SM memo and other investigation documents the deceased was travelling by standing near the door of the train in a negligent manner. The GRP did not recover any ticket from the possession of the deceased. The act of the deceased of travelling on the footboard without a ticket is a legal offence under Section 156, 137 of the Railway Act and it is also a violation of Section 124 (B) of the Railway Act. The monetary liability cannot be fastened on the Railway for the alleged incident.

4. In view of pleading of both the parties, and relevant documents produced on record, this Tribunal framed the following issues for just and proper adjudication of the Claim Application on merit within ambit of law.

5. That, in order to establish the claim, the Applicant No. 1 Sidheshwar Jha s/o Ramesvar Jha, stepped into the witness-box and filed the Affidavit in lieu of his examination-in-chief on record. He deposed that, on 19.08.2018 the deceased was travelling from Pune to Danapur Railway Station by local train. When the train was near Loni railway station he accidentally fell down from train. He succumbed to his injuries on 20.08.2018. The Applicant stated that the deceased was in possession of a second class Railway ticket from Pune to Danapur Railway Station. But it was lost in the untoward incident.

6. In the cross-examination of Applicant No. 1 Sidheshwar Jha s/o Ramesvar Jha, it was suggested on behalf of Respondent- Railway, that the alleged the deceased was not a bonafide passenger and the incident occurred while the deceased was trespassing the Railway tracks. But, the AW-1 Sidheshwar Jha s/o Ramesvar Jha, turned-down these allegations put forth on behalf of Respondent.

7. I have heard the Ld. Counsels appearing for the Applicant and Respondent. I have also gone through the documents filed by the Counsel for the Applicant and entire documents produced on record. It is not put into controversy that the victim succumbed to injuries received to him during the course of Railway accident. Before embarking into the merits of the matter, it would be appropriate to set- forth th