Bombay HC Awards ₹8L Compensation To Parents Of Man Who Died After Falling From Mumbai Local Train
The case involved the appeal of the deceased's parents, whose compensation claim was initially rejected by the Railway Claims Tribunal.
The Bombay High Court awarded a compensation of ₹8 lakh to the parents of a young commuter who tragically fell from a crowded Mumbai local train in 2010.
The case involved the appeal of the deceased's parents, whose compensation claim was initially rejected by the Railway Claims Tribunal. The incident occurred when a daily commuter, fell from a local train while traveling from Wadala to Chinchpokli. The young man, who held a valid monthly pass, suffered severe injuries from the fall and later died in a hospital.
A Bench of Justice Firdosh P. Pooniwalla, overturned the Tribunal's decision, which had dismissed the claim on the grounds that the deceased was not a "bonafide passenger," as no valid ticket was found on his person. The Court said, “"In my view, all this evidence, taken together, clearly shows that the deceased son of the Appellants had died due to accidentally falling down from a train at Sandhurst Road,"”
The High Court found that there was sufficient evidence to conclude that the young commuter's death was caused by an accidental fall from the train, which constituted an "untoward incident" under the Railways Act. The evidence considered by the court included police reports, medical certificates, and affidavits, all of which supported the claim that the death resulted from an accidental fall.
Despite the Railway Claims Tribunal rejecting the claim due to the absence of a ticket or pass and doubts about the investigation, the High Court took a different view. The Court noted that the inquest panchanama and injury report confirmed that the deceased had fallen from the train, and the injuries were consistent with such an accident.
The Court emphasized that the absence of the ticket or pass was not enough to undermine the legitimacy of the deceased's passenger status. The Court noted that the parents had adequately proven that their son was carrying a valid monthly pass, and it was then up to the Railway authorities to prove otherwise. The Court stated, "The appellants had clearly discharged the initial burden to show that the deceased was carrying a valid monthly pass and was a bonafide passenger. The burden then shifted onto the Respondent-Railways to show that the deceased was not carrying any such pass."
As a result, the High Court directed the Union of India to pay a compensation of ₹4 lakh each to the parents, totaling ₹8 lakh. The Court also set a deadline of eight weeks for the payment to be made, with an interest rate of 7 percent per annum if the payment was delayed beyond the specified period.
Cause Title: Shri Basir & Anr. v. Union of India, [2025:BHC-AS:652]
Appearance:
Petitioner: Advocates Kunal Bhanage, Akshay Pawar, and Priyanka Acharya
Respondent: Advocates TJ Pandian, Noorjahan Khan, and Gautam Modanwalm
