BINOD KUMAR SINHA Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) As the matter has been referred by the learned Single Judge, on account thereof, Hon'ble the Chief Justice listed the same after constituting the Division Bench.

(2.) From perusal of the order dated 11.02.2019 (order of reference), it is evident that no questionnaire has been formulated. In Brishketu Bihari Sinha vs. State of Bihar & Ors., 2019 2 PLJR 554, it has been observed by the Full Bench.

(3.) Having deficient on that very score, the matter would have been dealt with under the guise of principle laid down by the Full Bench as referred herein above however, after going through the order impugned, it appears to be prudent to resolve the issue which, in the opinion of the learned Single Judge appears to be poignant more particularly, when propriety of the earlier judgments Kedar Nath Singh vs. Union of India, 2013 3 PLJR 580, Jaleshwar Das vs. The Union of India, 2013 3 PLJR 450 based upon Division Bench decision Smt. Kaushalaya Devi & Ors. vs. Union of India through General Manager, North Eastern Railway, Gorakhpur, U.P., 2008 3 PLJR 711 have been doubted in the background of obligation having been cast under Chapter-VII of the Evidence Act. Furthermore, the learned Single Judge under para-5 of the order has observed that while deciding the issue in Kaushalya Devi (Supra) case as well as subsequent decisions so referred, the relevant provisions of law, apart from Chapter-VII of the Evidence Act, the definition of the passenger in terms of Section 2(29) of the Railway Act inconsonance with Section 124-A of the Railway Act has not been properly been considered and further, concluded under para-10 in following way: