Non-recovery of ticket cannot negate bona fide passenger status where occurrence of untoward incident is established.

The Appellant’s son, Yogesh (the deceased), was traveling from New Ghaziabad to Meerut City on 17.12.2017 via Train No. 54473

While the train was approaching Meerut City station, the deceased fell from the train due to a heavy rush and succumbed to his injuries the following day

The Railway Claims Tribunal (RCT) dismissed the claim on 30.09.2019, ruling that while an "untoward incident" occurred, the Appellant failed to prove the deceased was a bona fide passenger as no journey ticket was recovered and witness testimony was deemed unreliable

The Appellant, a 70-year-old illiterate resident of an economically weaker section, filed this appeal after a delay of 1540 days

1. Whether the delay of 1540 days in filing the appeal should be condoned given the Appellant's socio-economic status

2. Whether the deceased qualified as a bona fide passenger despite the non-recovery of a physical ticket and minor contradictions in witness statements

3. Whether death occurring while potentially deboarding a moving train constitutes an "untoward incident" under the Railways Act

Section 23 of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 and the Railways Act, 1989

Beneficial and social welfare legislations requiring a liberal, justice-oriented approach toward condoning delays to ensure genuine claims are not defeated on technicalities

The precedent set in Union of India v. Rina Devi, which established that death or injury while boarding or deboarding a train is an "untoward incident" and that the mere absence of a ticket does not negate bona fide passenger status if foundational facts of travel are shown

The Court first condoned the 1540-day delay, citing the Appellant’s poverty, illiteracy, and the loss of the family's sole breadwinner, referencing Mohsina v. UOI and Shalini Gihar v. UOI

Regarding the merits, the Court found that the RCT’s finding of an "untoward incident" was corroborated by the Station Master's statement, panchnama, and DRM inquiry

It rejected the RCT’s dismissal of witness AW-2’s testimony, noting that minor discrepancies regarding a platform ticket did not invalidate the substantive claim that the deceased purchased a travel ticket

Under the Rina Devi doctrine, once the Appellant established the foundational facts of the journey through oral evidence and official accident reports, the burden shifted to the Railways to prove the deceased was a trespasser, which it failed to do

The appeal was allowed, the delay condoned, and the matter remanded to the Tribunal to calculate and disburse compensation within two months

The parties were directed to appear before the Tribunal on 26.05.2026