Research › Search › Judgment

Patna High Court · body

2013 DIGILAW 545 (PAT)

Rafikul Islam v. Union of India

2013-04-24

AKHILESH CHANDRA

body2013
ORDER This appeal has been preferred against the order dated 09th October, 2007 passed in Claim Application No. 0A9800061 by Patna Bench of Railway Claims Tribunal, dismissing the application on contest finding no merit, but without cost. 2. The relevant undisputed facts in that on 05.02.1995 dead-body of one unknown male was found near railway track giving rise to institution of unnatural death case, bearing No.-24 dated 05.02.1995 on the information of the Station Master (Exhibit A-2). The postmortem examination (Report Exhibit A-3), conducted on 05.02.1995, indicates the death of unknown, caused by the injuries sustained, by hard and blunt substance. 3. As per the case of the appellant, the dead-body was of his son, namely, Shafikul Islam, who was travelling by 365 UP (Sealdah-Lalgola Passenger) and due to heavy rush was standing at the door and in between Khardaha and Sodepur he accidentally dashed on with a post and fallen down from the running train and expired. The second class ticket was lost and the appellant claimed for Rs. 2,00,000/- as compensation through application filed on 09.02.1998. By filing written statement, the claim was contested on the ground of deceased not being bona fide passenger and claim being exaggerated. 4. The learned counsel for the appellant contended that the Claim Tribunal has without any cogent reason dismissed the claim and deviated himself from the point in controversy. On the other hand, it is contended by the learned counsel representing the respondent-railway that the appellant could not have been able to establish that the deceased was his son and suffered railway accident causing his death. 5. It would not be out of place to mention here that the entire submissions made on behalf of the respondent-railway are contrary to its pleading and materials collected during evidence. The one page written statement containing only five small paragraphs, where in 2nd paragraph speaks as such:- "2. That the petitioner is called upon to prove that his son late Safikul Islam was a bonafide passenger in the train no. 365 UP (SDAH Lalgola) Passenger train between Sodepur & Khardah on 5.2.95. The one page written statement containing only five small paragraphs, where in 2nd paragraph speaks as such:- "2. That the petitioner is called upon to prove that his son late Safikul Islam was a bonafide passenger in the train no. 365 UP (SDAH Lalgola) Passenger train between Sodepur & Khardah on 5.2.95. Otherwise, he/she will be treated as tresspasser in the above train within the meaning of Sec. 55 of the Railway Act, 1989 which will disentitle him/her to any compensation." And in 4th paragraph, there is objection on the ground of the claim "being highly inflated, exaggerated and frivolous besides the claim being barred by Limitation Act." This goes to show that the railway admits the deceased being Safikul Islam, who is none else than the son of the appellant. This can also be inferred from the statements of the witnesses examined on behalf of the appellant, wherein, during cross-examination of Claimant No. 1, it is suggested that "Yeh Kahna galat hai ki mere ladka train cross kar raha tha aur train se kut gaya", and even there is no such suggestion to AW-2, who is also on the point of commencement of journey of the deceased with valid ticket and rush of train. 6. Only two witnesses "referred to above" have been examined by the appellant and none from the respondent-railway. Exhibit A-4 is the document in the shape of certificate of death issued by Calcutta Municipal Corporation on 07.07.1997, registered by Registration No. 70 dated 28.02.1995, indicating unknown identified as Safikul Islam, Son of Rafikul Islam and Exhibit A-5, is the abstract of particulars from police report, which may be useful to the persons concerned, submitted by the Superintendent of Police, Government Railway Police, Sealdah dated 07.07.2006, indicating Safikul Islam was the person dead in railway accident. 7. All such materials are sufficient to establish that the deceased was the son of the appellant and died in railway accident. All submissions made on the point of identification and its manner etc. appears meaning less in absence of any whisper in the written statement or challenge/suggestion during evidence adduced on behalf of the appellant. 8. On the point of deceased been bona fide passenger there is a clear decision of this Court by a Division Bench in Letters Patent Appeal between "Smt. Kaushalaya Devi & Ors. Vs. appears meaning less in absence of any whisper in the written statement or challenge/suggestion during evidence adduced on behalf of the appellant. 8. On the point of deceased been bona fide passenger there is a clear decision of this Court by a Division Bench in Letters Patent Appeal between "Smt. Kaushalaya Devi & Ors. Vs. Union of India, Through General Manager, North Eastern Railway Gorakhpur, U.P." reported in " 2008 (3) PLJR 711 ", wherein, paragraph-5 of the judgment reads as such:— "5. Railways Act provides prosecution of persons entering Railway Stations without valid journey ticket or platform ticket. That makes its abundantly clear that without a ticket, either for undertaking a journey or for the purpose of visiting the platform, no one is entitled to be within the precincts of a Railways Station. That the person was in the precincts of the Railway Station would, therefore, logically have a presumption that he had a ticket for him. That he did not have a ticket was obligatory on the part of the Railway Administration to prove." And likewise said case, in the instant matter also the railway has not produced even a single witness or chit of paper to show that the deceased was a ticket less passenger. Further, the dead-body was left uncared and was under the control of Railway Administration for a substantial period, so the loss of ticket due to lapse of time cannot be ruled out. The same has subsequently been followed in a case between "Chandarik Sah @ Chandrika Sah & anr. Vs. The Union of India represented through the General Manager, East Central Railway, Hazipur (Bihar)" reported in " 2012 (2) PLJR 823 ." 9. In the result, the impugned order is set-aside and the appeal is hereby allowed. The respondent-railway is directed to make payment of Rs. 2,00,000/- as compensation to the appellant with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the application till date of actual payment.