An accidental fall from a train while boarding or de-boarding constitutes an 'untoward incident' under the Railways Act, and the principle of strict liability precludes the railway from denying compensation based on allegations of the victim's own negligence.

J U D G E M E N T

1. The present claim petition has been filed by the applicants Reetu (wife), Tanisha (daughter), Rishika (daughter), Saksham Janghu (son) and Sarita @ Sarita Devi (mother), of Surender Kumar under Section 16 of the Railway Claim Tribunal Act 1987, read with Section 124-A of The Railways Act, 1989 as amended up to date, seeking compensation to the tune of Rs. 8,00,000/- (Rupees Eight Lakhs Only), along with interest from the respondent railways on account of death of Surender Kumar (hereinafter called ‘deceased’) in an averred untoward incident.

2. The brief facts of the case, as stated by the applicants in Annexure- I in the claim application are reproduced hereunder in verbatim:

“1. That this unfortunate accident occurred on 28.08.2023

2. That Sh. Surender Kumar (since deceased) used to work in MCD and was a daily passenger from Inchhapuri to New Delhi and New Delhi to Inchhapuri vise versa and was having valid MST No. 68589469 for travelling valid from 25.08.2023 to 24.09.2023.

3. That on 28.08.2023, Sh. Surender Kumar (Since deceased) was going for his night duty and boarded the train from Inchhapuri and there was huge rush inside the train compartment and he was standing on the gate of the train compartment and when this train reached at Garhi Harsaru Railway Station, due to push of passengers, he accidently fell down from the train and tried to save himself, he tried to board the train again, but his hand slipped and he fell down from the train and sustained serious/grievous injuries all over his body and died on the spot of accident and from the spot of accident.

4. That the ticket and other articles were recovered from the possession of the deceased during his jamatalashi.

5. That the body of the deceased was removed to Civil Hospital, Gurugram where the post mortem was conducted on the body of the deceased, vide PMR No. SK/764/23.”

(Reproduced in verbatim)

It is stated in the claim application that the deceased was a bonafide passenger of the train and the incident is falling within the ambit of Section 123(c)(2) of the Railways Act, 1989, and therefore the claimants have sought compensation along with interest from the respondent railway.

3. Notice of claim application was issued to the respondent railway, who filed their written statement along with the statutory report of DRM Exhibit R-1.

It would be apposite here to reproduce preliminary objection Para No. 1 to 6 taken in the written statement as under in verbatim: -

1. That the claim petition filed by the applicant is not maintainable in the eyes of the law and the respondent cannot be held responsible for the incident in question.

2. That at the outset it is submitted that as per the statement of Train Manager Amit Dabas placed at page No. 34 of DRM's Report, the deceased was trying to board in fast moving Train from wrong/off side and met with the incident. Therefore, it is clear from the statement of Train Manager that the deceased has sustained self inflicted injury which falls under Section 124 A sub clause (b), therefore, the claimant is not entitled to claim any compensation and the instant Application is liable to be dismissed on this ground alone.

3. That further, the above said act of the deceased amounts to criminal act and falls within the proviso of Sec 124A(b)(c) of Railways Act, 1989. Because, it was within the knowledge of the deceased that he was endangering his life by boarding in fast moving Train that too from the wrong/off side meaning there by the act of means rea was in his mind. Secondly, t