Run-over deaths on tracks while using mobile phones are not "untoward incidents" absent proof of accidental fall.

On March 8, 2024, the deceased (Sh. Shukru) and his wife boarded Train No. 12427 (Reva Express) from Manikpur to Anand Vihar using a valid ticket

On March 9, 2024, the deceased was found dead at the Ajaibpur-Dadri section

The appellants claimed he fell from the train, constituting an "untoward incident." However, the Railway Claims Tribunal dismissed the claim on July 28, 2025, finding the deceased was "run over" by a different train while walking on the tracks

The appellants challenged this, citing the recovery of a valid ticket and the wife's testimony as an eyewitness

1. Whether the death of the deceased occurred due to an "untoward incident" (accidental fall from a train) as defined under Section 123(c) of the Railways Act, 1989

2. Whether the recovery of a journey ticket is sufficient to grant compensation in the absence of proof of an untoward incident

Section 123(c) of the Railways Act, 1989, which defines an "untoward incident" as the accidental falling of any passenger from a train carrying passengers

The Supreme Court's ruling in Union of India v. Rina Devi (2019), which clarifies that while death during boarding or de-boarding is an untoward incident, the burden remains on the claimant to prove that such an incident actually occurred

The principle of "fall followed by run-over" applies only if the initial fall is proved, as distinguished from precedents like Nisha Devi v. Union of India and Rajni & Anr. v. Union of India

The Court found that the appellants failed to prove the foundational fact of an accidental fall. It prioritized contemporaneous official records over the wife's testimony (AW-1), noting that the Station Master's memo and the Loco Pilot’s book — recorded immediately at 07:30 hours on the day of the incident — categorised the event as a "Man Run Over" (MRO)

The Assistant Loco Pilot (RW-1) of a different train (No. 12312) testified that the deceased was hit while walking on the tracks using a mobile phone with headphones

While the deceased's train (No. 12427) had an unscheduled halt nearby, there was no record of any passenger falling from it

The Court reasoned that since the evidence consistently indicated the deceased was on the track voluntarily and not as a consequence of a fall, the precedents regarding "untoward incidents" were inapplicable

The mere recovery of a journey ticket does not entitle claimants to compensation if the underlying cause of death is not an untoward incident

The High Court upheld the Tribunal's judgment and dismissed the appeal