JUDGMENT Anil Kumar, J. 1. Heard Sri Chandra Shekhar Sinha, learned Counsel for the appellant, Sri R.K.S. Chauhan, learned Counsel for the respondents and perused the record. Facts, in brief, of the present case are that Shitla Prasad Trivedi, aged about 60 years husband of Smt. Ram Rani alias Mangal Dei, on 5.9.1999 boarded at Alam Nagar station in train No. 3009 Doon Express from Lucknow to Haridwar after purchasing of second class journey ticket to go to Haridwar. He accidentally fell down from train at Alam Nagar railway station on 5.9.1999, sustained serious injuries and was admitted to Medical College, Lucknow but on 6.9.1999 died. 2. In view of the said facts a claim petition has been filed by her wife Smt. Ram Rani alias Mangal Dei before the Railway Claim Tribunal, Lucknow Bench, Lucknow, registered as Case No. OA 030091, Smt. Ram Rani alias Mangal Dei v. Union of India, Railway/appellant also filed written statement denying the allegation as mentioned in the claim petition. Further, a defence was taken that Sri Shitla Prasad Trivedi was not a bona fide passenger hence the railway is fully protected under Exemption clause of section 124-A of the Railway Act (herein after referred to as 'Act') as the accident is self inflicted attempt caused by his own criminal act. 3. The Railway Claims Tribunal by means of judgment and order dated 12.12.2007 allowed the claim petition, awarding  Rs. 4.00 lacks as compensation payable with an interest of 9% per annum from the date of application till the date of realization. Aggrieved by the same, Union of India through the General Manager, Northern Railway, New Delhi has filed the present appeal under section 23 of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987. 4. 4.00 lacks as compensation payable with an interest of 9% per annum from the date of application till the date of realization. Aggrieved by the same, Union of India through the General Manager, Northern Railway, New Delhi has filed the present appeal under section 23 of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987. 4. Sri Chandra Shekhar Sinha, learned Counsel for the appellant while challenging the impugned judgment submits that deceased Shitla Prasad Trivedi is not a bona fide passenger coupled with the fact that the Tribunal in the judgment mentioned that "there is heavy rush in the compartment as such he could not get a seat and had to remain at the door (of the compartment) and when the rain started due to jerk and jolt at Alam Nagar railway station, he fell down (not accidentally fell down ) and died" so as per the provisions of Clauses (b) and (c) of section 124-A read with section 154 of the Act, the judgment passed by the Tribunal is incorrect. 5. He further submits that the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal is misconceived, illegal against the evidence and material on record as well as the provisions of section 153, 154, 156 read with sub-section (b) and (c) of section 124-A and 123(c)(2) of the Act and passed after misconstruing the well settled legal position of law despite unambiguously holding that burden of proof lies upon the claimants to establish the alleged "accidental fall from the train carrying passengers", so liable to be set aside. 6. Learned Counsel for the respondent/claimants, on the other hand, submits that deceased is the bona fide passenger travelling in train and due to the jerk and jolt he fell down from the train. The accident comes within the ambit and scope of untoward incident as per the provisions as provided under section 123 of the Act, so the appeal filed by the appellant liable to be dismissed. 7. I have heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused the record. 8. Chapter XIII of the Act contains provisions (sections 123 to 129) with regard to liability to the Railway Administration for death and injury to passenger due to accidents. 9. Section 123 defines "accident" as well as "untoward incident". Definition of the 'accident' has been co-related with the 'untoward incident' given in section 124. 8. Chapter XIII of the Act contains provisions (sections 123 to 129) with regard to liability to the Railway Administration for death and injury to passenger due to accidents. 9. Section 123 defines "accident" as well as "untoward incident". Definition of the 'accident' has been co-related with the 'untoward incident' given in section 124. Section 124 provides that whenever an accident occurs, being either because of the collision between trains of which one is a train carrying passenger or the derailment of or other accident to a train or any part of a train carrying passengers, then whether or not there has been any wrongful act, neglect or default on the part of the railway administration such as would entitle a passenger who has been injured or has suffered a loss to maintain an action and recover damages in respect thereof, the railway administration shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law, be liable to pay compensation to such extent as may be prescribed. 10. The plain reading of section 123 reveals that in the event of accident causing injury or death of the passenger, the Railway shall be responsible to pay damages notwithstanding the fact that the railway administration is not at fault and in view of any other law. 11. Section 124-A relates to the compensation on account 'untoward incident'. It provides that when during the course of working in railway an 'untoward incident' occurs, then whether or not there has been any wrongful act, neglect or default on the part of the railway administration such as would entitle a passenger who has been injured or killed, the railway administration shall be liable to pay compensation subject to exceptions given in the proviso. 12. For convenience, section 123, 124 and 124-A of the Act are reproduced as under: "123. 12. For convenience, section 123, 124 and 124-A of the Act are reproduced as under: "123. Definitions.--In this Chapter, unless the context otherwise requires-- (a) "accident" means an accident of the nature described in section 124; (b) "dependent" means any of the following relatives of a deceased passenger, namely: (i) the wife, husband, son and daughter, and in case the deceased passenger is unmarried or is a minor, his parent; (ii) the parent, minor brother or unmarried sister, widowed sister, widowed daughter-in-law and a minor child of a pre-deceased son, if dependent wholly or partly on the deceased passenger; (iii) a minor child of a pre-deceased daughter, if wholly dependent on the deceased passenger; (iv) the paternal grand-parent wholly dependent on the deceased passenger. [(c) 'untoward incident' means-- (1)(i) the commission of a terrorist act within the meaning of sub-section (1) of section 3 of the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987 (28 of 1987); or (ii) the making of a violent attack or the commission of robbery or dacoity; or (iii) the indulging in rioting, shoot-out or arson, By any person in or on any train carrying passengers, or in a waiting hall, clock room or reservation or booking office or on any platform or any other place within the precincts of a railway station; or (2) the accidental falling of any passenger from a train carrying passenger] 124. Extent of liability.--When in the course of working in a railway, an accident occurs, being either a collision between trains of which one is a train carrying passengers or the derailment of or other accident to a train or any part of a train carrying passenger, then whether or not there has been any wrongful act, neglect or default on the part of the railway administration such as would entitle a passenger who has been injured or has suffered a loss to maintain an action and recover damages in respect thereof, the railway administration shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law, be liable to pay compensation to such extent as may be prescribed and to that extent only to loss occasioned by the death of a passenger dying as a result of such accident, and for personal injury and loss, de-struction, damage or deterioration of good owned by the passenger and accompanying him in his compartment or on the train sustained as a result of such accident. Explanation.--For the purposes of this section "passenger" includes a railway servant on duty. 124-A. Compensation on account of untoward incident.--When in the course of working in a railway an untoward incident occurs, then whether or not there has been any wrongful act, neglect or default on the part of the railway administration such as would entitle a passenger who has been injured or the dependent of a passenger, who has been killed to maintain an action and recover damages in respect thereof, the railway administration shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law, be liable to pay compensation to such extent as may be prescribed and to that extent only for loss occasioned by the death of, or injury to, a passenger as a result of such untoward incident: Provided that no compensation shall be payable under this section by the railway administration if the passenger dies or suffers injury due to-- (a) suicide or attempted suicide by him; (b) self inflicted injury; (c) his own criminal act; (d) any act committed by him in a state of intoxication or insanity; (e) any natural cause or disease or medical or surgical treatment unless such treatment becomes necessary due to injury caused by the said untoward incident. Explanation.--For the purpose of this section, "passenger" includes- (i) a railway servant on duty; and (ii) a person who has purchased a valid ticket for traveling by a train carrying passenger, on any date or a valid platform ticket and becomes a victim of an untoward incident." 13. On interpreting the aforesaid provisions reproduced here above, it is ample clear that Parliament to its wisdom had provided that burden is of railway to take necessary safety measures. The combined reading of section 57 of the Act further provides that in every compartment of the train, the maximum number of passengers shall be indicated. In case sections 50, 51, 57 of the Act reads combinedly then inference may be drawn that maximum number of passenger keeping the seating capacity of the compartment should be regulated by the Railway. Though Act does not provide in what manner that should be done but intention of the legislation is clear by making provisions that in case accommodation is not available in the class of carriage or train for which ticket is issued then price of ticket should be refunded. Though Act does not provide in what manner that should be done but intention of the legislation is clear by making provisions that in case accommodation is not available in the class of carriage or train for which ticket is issued then price of ticket should be refunded. Once the maximum number of passenger has been notified for each compartments then burden lies on the railway to ensure that compartments of the train are not over crowed to such extent which may hazardous to the public life or may cause to accident. 14. Legal Maxims - Salus Populi Est Suprema Lex Means "regard for the public welfare is the highest law." 15. Sections 57, 58 and 59 have been provided in the Act to secure safety measures and welfare of the people at large. The burden lies on the Railway to give effect the statutory provisions in its letter and spirit. 16. Section 124 categorically provides that "whether or not, there has been any wrongful act, neglect or default on the part of the railway administration", the injured or the dependent of the passenger who has been killed shall be entitled for damages in respect thereof. Accordingly, the passenger travelling on train shall be entitled for damages or compensation. In the event of accident or untoward incident, the presumption shall always be in favour of the passenger with regards to bona fide unless rebutted by the material and cogent evidence. 17. Accordingly to Legal Maxims "Necessitate inducit Previlegium Quoad jura Privata" means, necessity gives a privilege as to private rights. In the Broom's legal Maxims, it has been observed as under: "The law chargeth no man with default where the act is compulsory and not voluntary, and where there is not a consent and election; and therefore if either there be an impossibility for a man to do otherwise, or so great a perturbation of the judgment and reason as in presumption of law man's nature cannot overcome, such necessity carried a privilege in itself." 18. In the present case, nothing has brought on record by the appellant by filing affidavit that compartment where the deceased was traveling, was not crowded. In the present case, nothing has brought on record by the appellant by filing affidavit that compartment where the deceased was traveling, was not crowded. Tribunal had also recorded finding that compartment was over crowded and there was no place to accommodate the deceased inside the compartment and the specific case of the respondent/claimant before the Tribunal was that deceased fell down from train because of sudden jerk caused by the train as a result of which he died, so keeping the provisions contained in sections 50, 51, 57, 58, 59 of the Act, since the appellant has failed to discharge statutory obligation to regulate the passengers in the compartment of the train and because of necessity the deceased or the people are even in over crowded train generally used to travel in second class, their bona fide may not be doubted. 19. Thus keeping in view the said fact as well as the responsibility to provide safety measures by taking necessary steps, falls within the domain of the Railway authorities and in default of such obligation, the passengers cannot be faulted while travelling with the valid ticket within a position near the door. So on considering the factual position of the case and arguments advanced by the learned Counsels on either side and on perusing the impugned order of the Tribunal, this Court does not find any lapse in the conclusions arrived at regarding mode of accident and the issue of travel of the deceased as a bona fide passenger. 20. For the foregoing reasons, the appeal lacks merit and is dismissed as such. No order as to cost.