Gujarat High Court
Mala Kiran Dantani vs Union Of India on 23 July, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/291/2020 ORDER DATED: 23/07/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 291 of 2020
================================================================
MALA KIRAN DANTANI & ORS.
Versus
UNION OF INDIA
================================================================
Appearance:
MR KUNAL M SHAH(5588) for the Appellant(s) No. 1,2,3,4,5,6,7
MR PJ MEHTA(467) for the Appellant(s) No. 1,2,3,4,5,6,7
MS ARCHANA U AMIN(2462) for the Defendant(s) No. 1
================================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN M. DESAI
Date : 23/07/2025
ORAL ORDER
1. Heard learned advocate Mr. P. J. Mehta for the appellants and learned advocate Ms. Archana Amin for the respondent. Perused the record.
2. The challenge in the present appeal is by the appellants -
original applicants challenging the judgment and award dated 18.11.2019 passed by learned Railway Claims Tribunal, Ahmedabad in Claim Application No.OA/2016/205.
3. The facts in brief of the case are as under:
* On 19-04-2014, deceased was travelling from Page 1 of 10 Uploaded by VATSAL S. KOTECHA(HC00352) on Tue Jul 29 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Jul 29 23:07:36 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/291/2020 ORDER DATED: 23/07/2025 undefined Palanpur to Bhuj with a valid railway ticket in general compartment of train bearing No.59426, named Palanpur Bhuj Passenger. As the train reached at platform No.1 of Samakhiyali Railway Station, deceased got down from the train to drink water while re-boarding the compartment, as the train suddenly started moving from platform No.1, because of the sudden jerk and jolt of train, deceased lost his balance and accidentally fell down from the train. Resultantly, deceased sustained multiple crushed injuries.
* On 28-04-2014, the deceased passed away. The legal heirs and representatives of the deceased filed a claim application under Section 16 of Railway Claims Tribunal Act read with Section 124A of Railways Act. The respondent Railway authorities appeared and filed Written Statement and DRM report. Issues were framed by learned Tribunal. Affidavit of statement was submitted by claimant. Page 2 of 10 Uploaded by VATSAL S. KOTECHA(HC00352) on Tue Jul 29 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Jul 29 23:07:36 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/291/2020 ORDER DATED: 23/07/2025 undefined Railway authorities examined Station Master. * After considering the evidence on record, learned Tribunal dismissed the claim application. * Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and award, the claimants - appellants have filed the first appeal.
4. Learned advocate for the appellants - claimants submitted that on 19-04-2014, deceased was travelling from Palanpur to Bhuj with a valid railway ticket in general compartment of train bearing No.59426, named Palanpur Bhuj Passenger and when the train reached at platform No.1 of Samakhiyali Railway Station, deceased got down from the train to drink water and while re-boarding the train, due to sudden jolt and jerk of the train, deceased lost balance and fell down. Resultantly. deceased sustained crushed injuries and died on 28-04-2014. The GRP, Gandhinagar prepared Inquest Panchnama and also prepared Panchnama of the place of Page 3 of 10 Uploaded by VATSAL S. KOTECHA(HC00352) on Tue Jul 29 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Jul 29 23:07:36 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/291/2020 ORDER DATED: 23/07/2025 undefined incident. It is submitted that the deceased passed away in an untoward incident and the affidavit stating facts submitted by the widow of deceased has remained unchallenged as the claimant was not cross-examined by railway authorities.
5. It is further contended that as per Rule 4 of Railway Passengers (Manner of Investigation of Untoward Incidents) Rules, 2003 casts duty upon Station Master, Guard, Conductor and Train Ticket Examiner In-Charge of the train. As per sub-rule (1) of Rule 4, if an untoward incident occurs at the station, the concerned station superintendent shall immediately report such incident within 24 hours of the occurrence to the Divisional Security Commissioner in Form- I. The form-I was filled up by Station Superintendent on 20.6.2016. Form-II was also filled up by SIPF-GIM after 24 hours of the occurrence of an untoward incident. The oral deposition of the witness who has been examined by the respondent also states that Mr. Arvind Kumar, Assistant Station Master on 19.4.2014, was on duty. As per his Page 4 of 10 Uploaded by VATSAL S. KOTECHA(HC00352) on Tue Jul 29 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Jul 29 23:07:36 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/291/2020 ORDER DATED: 23/07/2025 undefined statement, the body of an unknown person was found at platform No.1, but the said witness does not state in specific terms as to when the incident was reported as per sub-rule (1) of Rule 4. The fact of the occurrence of an untoward incident has not been controverted by leading cogent and convincing evidence by Railway authorities and therefore a presumption is required to be drawn that the untoward incident had occurred on 19-04-2014 and while re-boarding the train, due to jerk and jolt of the train, deceased fell down from the train and sustained crushed injuries. The DRM report further strengthens the case of the claimant. The said DRM report dated 26-08-2016 indicates that on 19-04-2014, the deceased while trying to board a running train lost balance and crushed under the train. The said DRM report is after almost 2 years of the occurrence of incidents. The DRM report is not the conclusive proof to disclaim the claimants from claiming compensation. No other submissions are made except the above.
6. Per Contra, learned advocate for the respondent - Railway Page 5 of 10 Uploaded by VATSAL S. KOTECHA(HC00352) on Tue Jul 29 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Jul 29 23:07:36 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/291/2020 ORDER DATED: 23/07/2025 undefined Authority has supported the judgment and award. It is contended by learned advocate for the respondent that DRM report dated 26-08-2016 was submitted after investigation and on investigation, it was found that the deceased was in a drunken condition and while trying to board the train lost balance and died. The accident has occurred due to negligence on the part of the deceased and therefore the incident doesn't fall within the definition of an untoward incident as defined under the Act. It is further contended that the alleged incident has occurred at Samakhiyali Railway Station at 18.45 hours, whereas, the memo of information of lying a body at line No.1 was given on 28-04-2014 at 6.15 hours. It is contended that for almost 12 hours, the incident of falling down from a train could not gone unnoticed by any persons of Railway Administration. No other submissions are made except the above.
7. I have considered the submissions canvassed by learned advocates for the respective parties and perused the Record & Proceedings.
Page 6 of 10 Uploaded by VATSAL S. KOTECHA(HC00352) on Tue Jul 29 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Jul 29 23:07:36 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/291/2020 ORDER DATED: 23/07/2025 undefined
8. The deceased, as per the affidavit of statement of fact, was travelling from Palanpur to Bhuj with a valid ticket on 19-04- 2014 by a train bearing No.59426 Palanpur-Bhuj Passenger Train. As the deceased, after drinking water at Samakhiyali Railway Station, while re-boarding the train due to jerk and jolt of train lost balance and fell down from the train. Undisputedly, GRP Gandhidham entered the incident in its register and thereafter Inquest Panchnama was carried out and Panchnama of the place of incident was also carried out. The DRM report, undisputedly, is dated 26-08-2016 which is almost after a period of 2 years of the happening of the incident. As per Sub-Rule (1) of Rule 4 of Railway Passengers (Manner of Investigation of Untoward Incidents) Rules, 2003, if an untoward incident occurs at the station, duty is cast upon the station superintendent to immediately report such incident within 24 hours to the Divisional Security Commissioner in Form-I. Form-I which is placed on record at page No.145 of the Record and Proceedings reflects the date of filling up Form-I is 20-06-2016. Form-II was filled up by Page 7 of 10 Uploaded by VATSAL S. KOTECHA(HC00352) on Tue Jul 29 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Jul 29 23:07:36 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/291/2020 ORDER DATED: 23/07/2025 undefined SIPF-GIM without mentioning any date.
9. It appears from the Record that the Railway Administration has failed to report the incident within 24 hours of the occurrence of an untoward incident. The DRM report, which is placed on record and which has been heavily relied upon by Railway Administration is prepared without mentioning about whose statements were recorded and without substantiating any reasons. The DRM report states that as per the statement of the wife of deceased, deceased was in a drunken condition and while trying to re-board in train, he fell down which is a sole negligence on the part of deceased. When a specific mention is made in DRM report that the deceased was in a drunken condition and has remained negligent, heavy burden lies upon the Railway Administration to discharge the same. As observed earlier, Railway Administration has neither cross-examined the claimant nor led any evidence in support of the DRM report. The learned Commissioner has considered a fact which is mentioned in the DRM report that the GRP / GIM after Page 8 of 10 Uploaded by VATSAL S. KOTECHA(HC00352) on Tue Jul 29 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Jul 29 23:07:36 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/291/2020 ORDER DATED: 23/07/2025 undefined getting the postmortem done at Government Hospital, gave dead body to the family members of deceased on 20.4.2014. Without any evidence on record with regard to report of the occurrence of untoward incident within 24 hours, learned Commissioner has committed an error in relying upon such giving away the dead body to the family members of the deceased by GRP/GIM on 20.4.2014.
10. Learned tribunal has observed in the decision that various statements of relatives were recorded during investigation and but no such statements of relatives or any other persons have been produced by Railway Administration before the learned Tribunal. Without any evidence that the deceased was trying to board in a running train and the incident has occurred due to negligent act of the deceased, the claim of the claimant cannot be rejected.
11. The record reveals that the incident had occurred on 19.4.2014 and in absence of any contrary evidence placed on record by Railway Administration, it is established by Page 9 of 10 Uploaded by VATSAL S. KOTECHA(HC00352) on Tue Jul 29 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Jul 29 23:07:36 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/291/2020 ORDER DATED: 23/07/2025 undefined claimants that the incident is an untoward incident and, therefore, the Railway Administration is liable to compensate claimants. The learned Tribunal has committed an error of interpreting facts and the Rules and erred in dismissing the claim application.
12. In view of above, the present appeal is allowed. Thereby, the judgment and award dated 18.11.2019 passed by learned Railway Claims Tribunal, Ahmedabad in Claim Application No.OA/2016/205 is quashed and set aside.
13. Record & Proceedings, if any, be sent back to the concerned Court forthwith. No order as to costs.
(D. M. DESAI,J) vk Page 10 of 10 Uploaded by VATSAL S. KOTECHA(HC00352) on Tue Jul 29 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Jul 29 23:07:36 IST 2025