MANGLU GHOSH Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS first appeal is filed under Section 23 of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 impugning the judgment of the Tribunal dated 29.7.2011 by which the claim petition filed by the appellants/claimants/parents of the deceased Prashanta Ghosh was dismissed.

(2.) THE facts of the case are that the deceased Prashanta Ghosh, a resident of West Bengal was travelling from Malda Town to Delhi on 26.6.2007 after purchasing a railway journey ticket bearing no.20992056. Deceased Prashanta Ghosh boarded the train no. 3483 Up Farakha Express from Malda Town to Delhi on 26.6.2007. When the train reached near Dabar Railway Station, and which is near Bulandshehar; UP, at about 12.45 at night, the deceased Prashanta Ghosh accidently fell down from the train on account of sudden jerk/jolt in the train, and this accident resulted in his death. The matter was reported to the police who lodged the DD No.45 dated 28.6.2007. The subject claim petition was thereafter filed by the appellants/petitioners.

(3.) THE judgment of the Tribunal in my opinion is quite clearly illegal. It is to be noted that liability of the Railways is indubitably a strict liability as per Section 123(c) read with Section 124 -A of the Railways Act, 1989 and so held by the Supreme Court in the cases of Union of India Vs. Prabhakaran Vijaya Kumar & Ors. (2008) 9 SCC 527 and Jameela and Ors. Vs. Union of India (2010) 12 SCC 443.The judgments of the Supreme Court clarify that the liability is fastened on the Railways even assuming there is negligence of the bona fide passenger. I may note that the body of the deceased was found hundreds of kilometers from the point of beginning of the journey i.e somewhere near Bulandsheher, UP inasmuch as the journey commenced at Malda in West Bengal and clearly therefore if the body of the deceased was found lying on the tracks, it could only be if the deceased had fallen down from the train. I may note that the railways admittedly led no evidence whatsoever before the Tribunal, and therefore, this is an important aspect for this Court to hold that the death of Prashanta Ghosh took place in an untoward incident as per the meaning of the expression in Section 123(c) read with Section 124 -A of the Railways Act, 1989.