SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(RCT) 905

RAILWAY CLAIM TRIBUNAL - MUMBAI
Rajeev Jain, Member (J), Niva Singh, Member (T)
Anandkumar Munilal Gautam – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India – Respondent
OA (II U) /MCC/96/2023



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: None
For the Respondents: Ms. Ankita Rele

A death caused by a person being struck by a train while trespassing on railway tracks does not constitute an 'untoward incident' under Section 123(c)(2) of the Railways Act, 1989, and the claimant must prove bonafide passenger status to be entitled to compensation.

Headnote:(A) Railways Act, 1989 - Section 2(29), 123(c)(2), 124-A - Untoward incident - Death by railway accident - Deceased hit by train while crossing tracks - Whether deceased was a bonafide passenger - Burden of proof.

(B) Evidence - Burden of proof to establish 'bonafide passenger' status - When entry in official records (Loco Pilot’s logbook) confirms the deceased was hit while trespassing on tracks, the burden shifts to the claimant to provide credible evidence of traveling with a valid ticket - Mere claims of lost tickets without supporting proof are insufficient. (Paras 14, 15, 16)

Facts of the case:
The applicants, legal heirs of the deceased, filed for compensation claiming the deceased fell from a local train between Diva and Thane. The Railway Administration contended the deceased was trespassing on the tracks and was struck by a Mail Express train, as evidenced by the Motorman’s logbook and police reports. No ticket was recovered from the deceased.

Findings of Court:
The Tribunal found that the death was caused by the deceased crossing the tracks, not falling from a train. The applicants failed to prove bonafide passenger status or an untoward incident as defined under the Act.

Issues: Whether the deceased was a bonafide passenger and whether the death occurred due to an untoward accident as per the Railways Act, 1989.

Ratio Decidendi: An incident where a person is hit while crossing railway tracks is not an 'untoward incident' under Section 123(c)(2) of the Railways Act, 1989. Compensation is not payable when the victim was not a passenger traveling on a valid ticket and the death resulted from voluntary trespassing.

Result: Claim application dismissed.

Table of Content
1. jurisdiction and basis of the claim application under the railways act, 1989. (Para 1 , 2)
2. factual matrix, respondent's contention of trespassing, and framing of issues. (Para 3 , 4 , 5)
3. evaluation of evidence, affidavits, and cross-examination regarding passenger status and accident nature. (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11)
4. onus of proof for establishing bonafide passenger status and absence of ticket. (Para 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16)
5. distinction between an untoward incident and trespassing while crossing railway tracks. (Para 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25)
6. final determination on dependency and denial of compensation claim. (Para 26 , 27)

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 07.04.2022 involving death of Ranjit Anandkumar Gautam, (herein after referred as the deceased). The Applicants claim that, being parents and sisters of the deceased, they are the dependents of Ranjit Anandkumar Gautam.

2. It is pertinent to mention here that neither the Counsel for the Applicant nor Applicant have been present on the date of arguments. Hence this case is being decided on merit ex-parte in terms of Sec. 18(1) of Railway Claims tribunal act 1987.

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

3. It is stated that, the deceased, Ranjit Anandkumar Gautam, was a resident of Kalwa. It is alleged that, on 07.04.2022, the deceased was travelling by Local train from Diva to Thane Railway Station. At about 08.27 hrs when the train was in between Diva to Thane Railway Station, the deceased was pushed from inside and he was taken to the Thane Civil Hospital wherein he was declared dead. The Applicant has averred that the deceased had purchased the ticket but the same was lost.

4. 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 07.04.2022, information was received from SCOR to the Dy. SS/Thane that while crossing the Railway tracks at Km No 35/9 B, 5th line between Thane to Parsik Tunnel, a person was hit by Mail Express Train No. 12171 DN and got seriously injured. The DY/SS TNA made an announcement, the GRP Thane PC 104 Pashmavad Patil and RPF Thane's SI R.K. Patel along with stretcher hamal attended the spot and found a person lying cut into pieces between the tracks. Later, DYSS Thane issued memo no. 027976 and gave it to GRP Thane to take the victim to Thane Civil Hopsital for medical treatment, wherein he was examined by on duty doctor and declared dead before admission. The statement of the on duty loco pilot was recorded regarding the incident in which he stated that when his train was passing through Km No-35/9 B near Parsik Cabin between in between Thane and Diva railway station at 08.20 hrs he saw one person crossing the Railway track and the victim was hit by the train. In the statement recorded by the on-duty train manager regarding this incident, he stated that when the train suddenly halted while passing through Km No 35/9 B, the loco pilot informed him that a person was lying injured on the track after being hit by the train while walking on the track. When the on-duty staff attended the spot of the incident, they asked the people present there and they disclosed that this person was going to work while crossing the tracks with earphones in his ears, when he was hit by the Mail Express and got hit by the train and got injured. The spot of the incident is a trespassing prone area. In a statement of the deceased's father recorded by the police regarding this incident, he stated that his son worked in Bhaskar

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top