BEFORE THE RAILWAY CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH, MUMBAI CORAM: Dr. Ms. R. Sathyabama, Member (J)

RCT/Amaravati at Circuit Bench at RCT/Mumbai Shri. Mohit Sinha, Member (T) RCT, Mumbai Claim Application No: OA (II U) /MCC/0754/2017 Kumarsingh s/o Prabhat Gaikawad Age: 39 years, (Son of the deceased)

R/at: Railway quarter 634 C, 28 Unit, Nandgaon Rural, Manmad, Dist-Nasik 423104 (M.S.)

……….APPLICANT(s)

- Versus –

Union of India, Through, The General Manager, Central Railway, CSMT, Mumbai ………….RESPONDENT Appearances:

Mr. M. S. Chaudhari : Advocate for Claimant Ms. D. Fernandes : Advocate for Respondent Date of Institution : 11.10.2017 Date of Judgment : 11.02.2026 JUDGEMENT

1). This Claim Application is filed by the applicants under Section 16 of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 read with Section 123 (c) (2) & Section 124 - A of the Railways Act, 1989 for compensation arising out of an alleged untoward incident occurred on 22.07.2017 involving death of Shashi w/o Prabhat Gaikwad, (herein after referred as the deceased). The Applicant claim that, being son of the deceased, is dependent of Shashi w/o Prabhat Gaikwad.

The factual matrix of the matter in nut-shell is as below:

2. It is stated that, the deceased, Shashi w/o Prabhat Gaikwad, was a resident of Nashik. It is alleged that, on 22.07.2017, the deceased was travelling from Manmad to Shirdi railway station by train no. 51423, Igatpuri Pune Passenger. When the said train was at Manmad Railway Station, PF no. 6 the deceased accidentally fell down from the running train, sustained head injury and died on the spot. The Applicants have alleged that the deceased was holding a 2nd class Railway Ticket, from Manmad to Shirdi Railway Station, however, the said ticket was lost in the incident. It is therefore contended that the deceased was a bona-fide passenger and died in an untoward incident occurred on 22.07.2017.

3. In response to notice, Respondent – Railway Authority appeared and opposed the claim application. The respondent filed written statement and also produced on record the DRM’s report accompanied with other relevant police papers marked as “R-1”. It has been contended in the DRM’s Report that on 22.07.2017, Dy.SS/Manmad issued a memo to GRP that an unknown lady's dead body found on Platform no. 6, Manmad railway station. On the basis of the entire investigation and the statements recorded in the documents and the investigation of the RPF officers following facts came to light that:

i) In the Inquest Panchnama prepared by GRP, the panchs have clearly stated that the body of the deceased was lying in two parts in the track in the outer side line of PF no. 5 UP track, the body up to the waist was lying outside the track and the body below the waist was lying inside the track.

ii) In the Inquest Panchnama prepared by GRP, no railway travel ticket was recovered from the deceased. On the date of incident, Dy.SS, RPF, who was on duty at the spot has not mentioned about recovery of railway travel ticket, pass or travel authority from the spot. Hence, the deceased was not an authorised railway passenger.

iii) On 23.01.2018, the daughter-in-law of the deceased, Sonal Gaikwad, told in her statement to the investigating officer of RPF Manmad that her mother-in-law, deceased Shahsiprabhat Gaikwad, had left the house at 16.00 hrs saying that she was going to Manmad, but she had no information about the work. But in her reply to the police on 20.08.2017, she told that her mother-in-law had gone to Manmad for pension work and had said that she was going to Shirdi after her work. The statements given to the police and RPF are different. This makes it clear that the daughter-in-law of the deceased has hidden the fact about the motel.

iv) Kumarsingh Gaikwad, son of the deceased, told in his statement that the deceased, who was his mother, came to know from his wife Sonal at 17.00 hrs that his mother had gone to Manmad at 16.29 hrs. Why did she go, where did she go in Manmad, for what work did she