HEADING: Presence of quantifiable alcohol concentration in blood attracts statutory exception of intoxication under Section 124A of Railways Act.

The appellants challenged the judgment dated 26.06.2023 passed by the Railway Claims Tribunal, which dismissed their claim for compensation

On 27.10.2021, the deceased, Sh. Indresh, allegedly fell and sustained fatal injuries while attempting to board Train No. 02416 at Hazrat Nizamuddin Railway Station

While the deceased possessed a valid ticket, the Tribunal found he was in a state of intoxication based on a viscera report

The appellants also filed an application for condonation of a 250-day delay in filing the appeal, citing economic hardship

1. Whether the 250-day delay in filing the appeal should be condoned given the appellants' economic status

2. Whether the death of the deceased falls under the exception of "intoxication" under proviso (d) to Section 124A of the Railways Act, 1989, thereby exempting the Railway Administration from liability

The court applied Section 124A of the Railways Act, 1989, specifically proviso (d), which stipulates that no compensation is payable if a passenger dies due to an act committed in a state of intoxication

Section 23 of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 regarding the right to appeal

The court referenced Mohsina vs. Union of India regarding the liberal condonation of delay for economically weaker claimants

Distinguished Sh. Bhola Nath v. Union of India and Tuntun Kumar v. Union of India, which held that the mere "smell of alcohol" without scientific quantification is insufficient to prove intoxication

Reference was also made to Section 185 of the Motor Vehicles Act as a benchmark for permissible alcohol limits (30mg/100ml)

The court first condoned the delay of 250 days, noting the appellants' economic distress and the beneficial nature of the legislation

Regarding the merits, the court noted that unlike previous precedents where only a "smell" of alcohol was recorded, the present case relied on a scientific viscera examination report from the Forensic Science Laboratory

This report established a blood alcohol concentration of 109.6 mg/100 ml—substantially higher than the 30 mg/100 ml legal threshold for driving

The court observed that the appellants did not dispute the integrity, sealing, or preservation of the samples

Consequently, the court reasoned that attempting to board a moving train while in an advanced state of intoxication directly attracted the statutory exception under proviso (d)

The court emphasized that while beneficial legislation requires liberal interpretation, it cannot override express statutory exceptions

The High Court upheld the Tribunal's finding that the death was caused by an act committed in a state of intoxication, meaning no compensation was payable by the respondent under Section 124A of the Railways Act. The impugned judgment was affirmed, and the appeal was dismissed