Strict Liability Applies to Unexplained Rail Deaths Where Recovery of Valid Ticket Establishes Bona Fide Passenger Status

The deceased, Sarvan, purchased a journey ticket from Delhi Jn. to Chandausi Jn. on May 26, 2023

Appellants claim that during the journey (intervening night of May 26/27, 2023), the deceased fell from a running train near Chandausi Railway Station due to heavy rush and sustained fatal injuries

A valid journey ticket was recovered from his body

The Railway Claims Tribunal dismissed the claim on February 12, 2026, finding the incident was not an "untoward incident" because the body was found in two parts, suggesting a "run over" case rather than a fall, and failed to rule on whether the deceased was a bona fide passenger

1. Whether the incident in question constitutes an "untoward incident" within the meaning of the Railways Act, 1989

2. Whether the deceased was a bona fide passenger

The court applied Section 23 of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987, and the definition of "untoward incident" under the Railways Act, 1989

The court relied on the doctrine of strict liability under Section 124-A of the Railways Act, 1989, as established in Union of India v. Prabhakaran Vijaya Kumar, which mandates compensation unless statutory exceptions (suicide, self-inflicted injury, etc.) are proved

Regarding the burden of proof for bona fide passengers, the court followed Union of India v. Rina Devi, which holds that once a claimant files an affidavit of relevant facts, the burden shifts to the Railways to disprove the status

The High Court found that the Tribunal misappreciated contemporaneous records, including the Station Master’s memo and loco pilot's statement, which noted the body was "lying outside the track," not on it, contradicting the "run over" theory

The court noted that the presence of the body in two parts does not automatically rule out an accidental fall, and the Panchnama did not record the deceased as a trespasser or suicide victim

It further held that the absence of an eyewitness or the inability to identify a specific train is not fatal to a claim, as railway accidents often rely on circumstantial evidence

On the issue of bona fide travel, the court observed that the recovery of a verified ticket (No. UAF 95979130) from the deceased's person was unimpeached evidence that the Railways failed to rebut

The High Court set aside the Tribunal’s judgment and remanded the matter to the Tribunal to assess and disburse compensation within two months, directing the parties to appear on May 13, 2026