The Supreme Court of India has held that a passenger holding a valid ticket who boards a “wrong train” by mistake cannot be construed as not being a “bona fide passenger.” Reversing a High Court decision, the apex court restored a compensation award of Rs. 8,00,000/- granted by the Railway Claims Tribunal to the parents of a 23-year-old man who died in a railway accident.
The judgment was delivered by a bench comprising Justice Aravind Kumar and Justice N.V. Anjaria in a Civil Appeal arising from Special Leave Petition (C) No. 7188/2024.
Background of the Case
The case pertains to the death of Shravan Kumar Gupta, aged 23, who expired on 29.05.2013 due to injuries sustained in a railway accident. His parents, Shrikumar Gupta and another, filed a claim petition under Section 16G of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987, before the Railway Claims Tribunal.
The Tribunal, after evaluating pleadings and evidence, initially rendered a divergent opinion. The matter was then referred to the Chairman of the Tribunal, who rendered an opinion in favour of the claimants. The resulting majority opinion held that the deceased had purchased a ticket and was traveling on a wrong train (Godan Express, Train No. 11056), which had no stop at his destination, Maihar. Despite this, the Tribunal held he was a “bona fide passenger” and allowed the claim petition, awarding compensation of Rs. 4.00 Lakhs to each claimant, totaling Rs. 8,00,000/-.
The respondent-Railways successfully assailed this finding before the High Court of Madhya Pradesh. The High Court, by its order dated 20.03.2023, allowed the Railways’ appeal, leading the claimants to re-deposit 50% of the award amount (Rs. 4,00,000/-) they had already received. The claimants then appealed the High Court’s order before the Supreme Court.
Arguments of the Parties
The respondent-Railways, represented by the Additional Solicitor General, contested the claim, contending that the “death occurred on account of negligence attributable to the deceased himself or in other words, it was self-inflicted injury.” The Railways relied on the proviso to Section 124A, Clause (a) and (b) of the Act.
The Railways’ specific plea was that the deceased had purchased a ticket to travel from Satna to Maihar. Realising he had boarded a wrong train (Godan Express) with no stop at Maihar, the Railways argued he “had jumped from the running train resulting in injuries being sustained.” This, it was contended, was an act of self-negligence that absolved the Railways from the liability to indemnify the claim.
The counsel for the appellant-claimants argued that the finding of fact by the majority of the Tribunal members was reasonable and based on a proper appreciation of evidence, and that the High Court had erred in setting it aside.
The Court’s Analysis and Findings
The Supreme Court, upon perusing the records, found it undisputed that the deceased had purchased a valid ticket to travel from Satna to Maihar. The Court noted that on the date of the incident, “another express train has also entered the platform… by mistake obviously having seen the train having arrived at the same platform he has boarded the train to travel to Maihar. In fact said express train also passed through Maihar.”
The bench decisively held: “Merely because the deceased had boarded a wrong train, it cannot be construed that he was not a bona fide passenger so as to absolve the railway authorities from contending that deceased not being a bona fide passenger.”
The Court then addressed the Railways’ plea that the deceased had jumped from the train. While stating the plea “at first blush looks attractive,” the bench declared, “we are not inclined to accept the same for the simple reason that no sane person could have attempted to deboard or alight from a running train that too an express train.”
The judgment further held that the Railways’ contention was “a plea without proof.” The Court observed, “Having raised such a plea, it was incumbent upon the railway authorities to prove the same. However, the DRM Report is also silent on this aspect.”
Concluding its analysis, the Supreme Court found that the High Court’s order was unsustainable. “In that view of the matter, the finding recorded by the High Court contrary to the finding of fact recorded by two members of the Railway Claims Tribunal would not stand the test of law.”
Decision
The Supreme Court allowed the appeal and set aside the impugned order of the High Court dated 20.03.2023.
The Court ordered that the compensation of Rs. 8,00,000/- (Rupees Eight Lakhs) as awarded by the Railway Claims Tribunal be paid to the claimants. This amount is to carry interest @9% per annum from the date of the original tribunal award until the date of payment or deposit.
The respondent-Railways were directed to transfer the amount to the claimants’ accounts within an outer limit of three months from the date of the order (04th November, 2025).
The Court clarified the limited nature of its order, stating, “It is made clear that the aforestated order is passed in the peculiar facts obtained in this case, namely, the deceased having boarded a wrong train.”
