Case Note & Summary
The appeal arose from the death of Sanjesh Kumar Yagnik, who allegedly fell from a running train (Ranthambore Express) on 19.05.2017 due to overcrowding, sustaining fatal head injuries. His widow and minor son (appellants) filed a claim petition under Section 16 of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987, seeking compensation of ₹12,00,000. The Railway Claims Tribunal dismissed the claim on the ground that the deceased was not proved to be a bona fide passenger, as no ticket was recovered from his person or belongings, and the photocopy of tickets produced was considered doubtful due to lack of seizure memo and non-examination of the investigating officer. The High Court of Madhya Pradesh affirmed this decision, though it held the incident to be an 'untoward incident' under Section 123(c)(2) of the Railways Act. The Supreme Court, in appeal, examined whether the claimants had discharged the initial burden of proving that the deceased was a bona fide passenger. The Court noted that the railway records showed that ticket no. L10274210 was issued at 05:36 hours on the date of the incident from Indore to Ujjain. The Court held that this constituted prima facie evidence of ticket purchase, and the burden then shifted to the Railways to disprove it. The Railways failed to produce any evidence to rebut this, such as CCTV footage, guard logs, or alarm-chain records. The Court distinguished the case from those where no evidence of ticket purchase exists. Relying on Union of India v. Rina Devi and Kamukayi v. Union of India, the Court held that non-recovery of the ticket is not fatal. The Court allowed the appeal, set aside the judgments of the Tribunal and High Court, and directed payment of compensation of ₹8,00,000 with interest at 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition until realization.
Headnote
A) Railways Act - Untoward Incident - Bona Fide Passenger - Burden of Proof - Section 124-A, 123(c)(2) Railways Act, 1989 - The issue was whether the claimants had proved that the deceased was a bona fide passenger when no ticket was recovered from his body. The Supreme Court held that once the claimants produce prima facie evidence of ticket purchase (e.g., railway record showing ticket issuance), the burden shifts to the Railways to disprove it. Non-recovery of ticket is not fatal. The Court allowed the appeal and directed payment of compensation with interest. (Paras 8-10) B) Railways Act - Compensation - Interest - Section 124-A Railways Act, 1989 - The Court directed that the appellants are entitled to compensation of ₹8,00,000 with interest at 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition until realization, as per the prevalent rate. (Para 10)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the appellants, dependants of a deceased in an alleged railway accident, are entitled to compensation under Section 124-A of the Railways Act, 1989, despite non-recovery of the ticket from the deceased's person, when there is prima facie evidence of ticket purchase.
Final Decision
Appeal allowed. Impugned judgment of High Court and order of Tribunal set aside. Respondents directed to pay compensation of ₹8,00,000 with interest at 6% per annum from date of filing of claim petition until realization, within eight weeks.
Law Points
- burden of proof
- prima facie evidence
- bona fide passenger
- untoward incident
- strict liability
- compensation under Railways Act
