The Supreme Court directed the Railways to prioritise passenger safety and sought a clearer, time-bound response on specific safety concerns flagged in an internal report. The Court was hearing a matter relating to systemic lapses in railway operations and noted an important concern arising from the distinction between online and offline ticket-holders in the availability of accident insurance coverage.
The case arose from concerns regarding passenger safety and operational gaps within the Railways. A report was placed before the Court outlining several ongoing and proposed measures. During the hearing, questions emerged regarding the lack of clear timelines for safety-related initiatives and the disparity in accident insurance coverage between passengers who purchase tickets online and those who buy them offline.
The counsel appearing for the Railways submitted that the issues mentioned in the report were not necessarily the institution’s top priorities and were flagged only to indicate areas where conscious decisions had been taken in relation to safety. It was further stated that the Railways had undertaken several measures, but detailed timelines had not been finalized at the current stage.
The Amicus Curiae drew the Court’s attention to a significant concern, passengers purchasing tickets online were automatically provided accident insurance cover, whereas those buying tickets offline received no such benefit, raising questions of fairness and uniformity.
The Court, after examining the report, stated, “At the initial stage, the focus should be on the safety of the tracks and the railway crossings, from which other aspects would emerge.”
It noted that although the Railways had indicated what it proposed to undertake, “no definite timelines have been provided.” The Bench therefore directed the Railways to file a more comprehensive affidavit concentrating specifically on the two key issues highlighted in items 3 and 7 of the report.
Addressing the concern raised by the Amicus regarding insurance coverage, the Court observed that passengers purchasing tickets online had the benefit of accident insurance whereas offline purchasers did not. The Court required the ASG to seek clear instructions on “the reason for this distinction between the two modes of procurement of tickets.”
The Court also permitted the Railways to continue executing its broader plans for system wide improvements but emphasised that, for the moment, the primary focus must remain on the specific issues requiring immediate attention.
The Court directed the Railways to submit a detailed affidavit addressing the two identified safety issues and to respond on the disparity in insurance coverage. The matter has been listed for further hearing on 13 January 2026, with the Court maintaining its earlier directions.
Case Title: Union of India vs. Radha Yadav
Case No.: Miscellaneous Application No.741-742/2019
Coram: Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah, Justice K. Vinod Chandran
Advocate for Petitioner: Adv. Vikramjit Banerjee (A.S.G.), Nachiketa Joshi (Sr. Adv.), Bharti Tyagi, Sachin Sharma, Ayush Anand, Rajeshwari Shankar, Amrish Kumar (AOR)
Advocate for Respondent: None
Read Judgment @Latestlaws.com
Picture Source :
