Police records and prompt ticket production may establish bona fide passenger status and an untoward incident.

Rinku Devi was alleged to have been travelling by train with a valid second-class ticket when she fell from a moving train between Salanpur and Rupnarayan railway stations and died.

The Railway Claims Tribunal dismissed her family’s claim under Section 124A of the Railways Act, 1989, finding that they had not proved either that she fell from a train or that she was a bona fide passenger.

On appeal, the family relied on the railway ticket, police records and post-mortem report; the Railways disputed recovery of the ticket and argued that there was no eyewitness to the fall.

1. Whether the evidence established, on a balance of probabilities, that the deceased died in an untoward incident involving a fall from a train.

2. Whether the deceased was a bona fide passenger holding a valid journey ticket, entitling the applicants to compensation under Section 124A of the Railways Act, 1989.

The Court applied Section 124A of the Railways Act, 1989, in considering the claim for compensation arising from an alleged untoward incident.

It stated that railway compensation legislation is beneficial and that the claim need not be proved beyond reasonable doubt; the evidence is to be assessed on the touchstone of preponderance of probabilities.

The Court also observed that, where eyewitness evidence is unlikely to be available, police and railway records may be relied upon to determine whether an incident occurred.

Although counsel cited several decisions, the judgment does not expressly set out or apply their specific legal tests.

The Court considered the deceased’s body having been found beside the railway track, the inquest and police final report, and the husband’s evidence that the deceased had travelled by train with their daughter.

It found that the ticket had been handed to the police on the day of the incident and that the husband’s evidence about the ticket being kept in the daughter’s bag was not shaken in cross-examination; the allegation that the ticket was planted was therefore not accepted.

The Court also faulted the railway enquiry for not properly considering the police report and the husband’s account.

Taken together, the evidence established the incident and the deceased’s bona fide passenger status on a preponderance of probabilities.

It held the applicants entitled to compensation of ₹8,00,000, with interest at 6% per annum from the date of filing the claim until the date of judgment.

The Railway Authority was directed to deposit the amount and interest with the Registrar General of the High Court within eight weeks of communication of the order, after which the applicants could withdraw it upon completing the necessary formalities.