Injury caused by an adjacent train while boarding from the off-side constitutes an untoward incident.

On 28 February 2018, Om Prakash and Rameshwar, accompanied by their wives and other villagers, reached Tughlakabad Railway Station to board Train No. 19020, carrying journey tickets for Tughlakabad–Gangapur City.

Amid heavy passenger rush, the deceased allegedly fell or were struck while attempting to board the train. They were hit by Train No. 12472, running on the adjacent line, and subsequently died from their injuries.

The dependants of Om Prakash and Rameshwar filed separate claims before the Railway Claims Tribunal. The Tribunal rejected both claims, principally holding that the deceased had been hit while standing on the adjacent railway line and were not injured while boarding Train No. 19020.

The High Court heard both appeals together because they arose from the same occurrence and involved common questions of fact and law.

The record included journey tickets, the Loco Pilot’s Rough Journal, the Station Master’s Diary, police and medical records, the DRM report, and witness statements.

Whether the deceased were bona fide passengers for the purposes of the Railways Act, 1989.

Whether the deceased’s deaths, caused by being struck by Train No. 12472 while attempting to board Train No. 19020 from the off-side, constituted an “untoward incident” under Section 123(c) read with Section 124-A of the Railways Act, 1989.

Whether the deceased’s conduct amounted to a self-inflicted injury falling within the exclusion contained in the proviso to Section 124-A.

The Court applied Sections 123(c) and 124-A of the Railways Act, 1989, under which death or injury arising from an “untoward incident” attracts statutory compensation, subject to the exclusions in the proviso to Section 124-A, including self-inflicted injury.

The Court relied on Union of India v. Rina Devi, (2019) 3 SCC 572, which holds that merely attempting to board a train from the non-platform or off-side does not automatically constitute a self-inflicted injury; the conduct must be shown to be totally imprudent, irrational, callous, and unmindful of the consequences.

The compensation scheme under Section 124-A is a beneficial, no-fault statutory remedy, and negligence alone does not necessarily take an occurrence outside its scope.

The Court held that both deceased persons were bona fide passengers because journey tickets had been produced and the respondent did not dispute their purchase; the Tribunal had also not recorded any adverse finding on passenger status.

On the nature of the occurrence, the Court found that the respondent’s own case established heavy passenger congestion and an attempt by the deceased to board Train No. 19020 from the off-side.

The Loco Pilot’s Rough Journal recorded that “two persons were hit from the side,” while the Station Master’s Diary stated that two persons were injured by Train No. 12472 while hanging from the train.

These records showed that Train No. 12472 caused the impact but did not establish that the deceased had independently and deliberately positioned themselves on the adjacent line.

Applying Rina Devi, the Court concluded that, at most, the deceased had been negligent in attempting to board from the off-side; such negligence could not, without more, be treated as an intentional or self-inflicted injury under Section 124-A.

The statement of Lajja Devi, which described the heavy rush, the boarding attempt, and the subsequent impact by a train on the parallel line, supported this conclusion.

It held that the deceased were bona fide passengers and that the occurrence constituted an “untoward incident” under Section 123(c) read with Section 124-A of the Railways Act, notwithstanding that the fatal impact was caused by Train No. 12472 rather than the train they were attempting to board.

The conduct attributed to the deceased did not qualify as self-inflicted injury merely because they attempted to board from the off-side.

The Tribunal’s judgments were set aside, and both matters were remanded to the Tribunal to assess compensation in accordance with law and direct disbursement within two months of receiving the High Court’s order.

The matters were directed to be listed before the Tribunal on 10 September 2026.