Recently, the Supreme Court restored compensation to the family of a young railway accident victim, holding that boarding a wrong train does not strip a passenger of bona fide status in a matter concerning liability under the Railway Claims Tribunal Act. The Court observed that no prudent person would leap from a moving express train, rejecting the Railways’ claim of self-inflicted injury.
Brief Facts:
A young man travelling from Satna to Maihar lost his life after suffering injuries in a railway accident. His parents approached the Railway Claims Tribunal seeking statutory compensation. The Railways opposed the claim, asserting that the deceased had acted negligently and that the incident amounted to a self-inflicted injury. The Tribunal’s members delivered differing views, resulting in the matter being placed before the Chairman, who ultimately held in favour of the claimants and treated the deceased as a bona fide passenger. Compensation was accordingly awarded.
The Railways challenged this finding before the High Court, which reversed the award. Aggrieved, the parents approached the Apex Court.
Contentions of the Claimants:
The counsel for the claimants argued that the Tribunal’s majority opinion correctly appreciated the evidence and reached a reasonable conclusion. It was submitted that the deceased had purchased a valid ticket and mistakenly boarded an express train arriving at the same platform. The counsel contended that the High Court erred in relying on the dissenting view and had overturned a well-founded factual finding, resulting in grave injustice.
Contentions of the Respondent-Railways:
Opposing the appeal, the Railways submitted that the deceased intended to alight at Maihar but, upon boarding the wrong train, attempted to jump from the moving express train, causing fatal injuries. It was argued that such conduct amounted to self-negligence, attracting the bar under the proviso to Section 124A of the Railways Act. The Railways contended that liability cannot arise when a passenger’s own actions lead to the accident.
Observations of the Court:
The Court noted that there was no dispute regarding the deceased having purchased a valid ticket for travel between Satna and Maihar. The Court accepted that another express train had entered the platform at the same time, and the deceased had boarded it under a mistaken belief. The accident report confirmed the presence of a valid ticket.
The Court stressed that merely boarding the wrong train does not deprive a traveller of the status of a bona fide passenger. Addressing the allegation of self-inflicted injury, the Bench observed that, “No sane person would attempt to jump from a moving express train. Such a plea, when raised, must be proved by the Railways. In this case, there is no material to show that the deceased jumped from the train, nor does the accident report support this theory.”
The Bench held that both Tribunal members had rightly concluded that the deceased remained a bona fide passenger and that the Railways failed to substantiate their defence. The High Court’s contrary finding, the Court said, was unsustainable.
The decision of the Court:
Allowing the appeal, the Top Court set aside the High Court’s judgment and restored the Tribunal’s award. The Court directed that compensation of ₹8,00,000 be paid to the deceased’s parents as originally ordered, together with 9% interest from the date of the Tribunal’s award until payment. The Railways have been granted three months to transfer the amount to the claimants through electronic means. The Court clarified that the order was passed considering the specific circumstances of the case, particularly the accidental boarding of the wrong train.
Case Title: Shrikumar Gupta & Anr. vs. Union of India
Case No.: SLP(C) No.7188/2024
Coram: Justice Aravind Kumar, Justice N.V. Anjaria
Advocate for Petitioner: Adv. Talha Abdul Rahman (AOR), Rupali Samuel, M Shaz Khan, Sudhanshu Tewari, Aditi Soni, Rafid Akhter, Faizan Ahmed
Advocate for Respondent: Advs. Brijender Chahar (A.S.G.), B.K.Satija, Yashraj Bundela, Anuj Srinivas Udupa, Dheeraj Jain, Mili Baxi, Amrish Kumar (AOR)
Read Judgment @Latestlaws.com
Picture Source :
