Mumbai: Railways To Compensate ₹8 Lakh Each To Families Of 12 Victims Who Died From Train Falls

Mumbai: The Mumbai Railway Claims Tribunal has awarded compensation of Rs 8 lakh each to the families of 12 individuals who died due to accidental falls from trains. The tribunal's decision, passed between September 2 -September 20, addresses the tragic deaths of bonafide train travelers, highlighting the responsibility of the Railways under the doctrine of strict or no-fault liability.

Out of 32 cases decided in September under the cause of 'Untoward Incident'—specifically accidental falls—the tribunal accepted the claims of 12 families on the basis of merits of the case. Each family had argued that their loved ones were bona fide passengers, and their deaths were caused solely by the negligence of the Railways.

In its defense, the Railway authority argued that the passengers were at fault for standing on the footboard of moving trains, which is an offense under Section 156 of the Railway Act. The Railways contended that these passengers' deaths resulted from their own negligence and, therefore, it could not be held liable. This argument was made in the 12 cases, one of it being in the case of Aotsingh Chauhan & Ors vs. Union of India, Through the General Manager, Central Railway, C.S.M.T, Mumbai(one of the 12 judgments)

However, the tribunal rejected the Railway's defense, citing the Supreme Court's ruling in *Jameela & Ors vs. Union of India*, where it was held that standing at the open door of a train compartment may constitute negligence but does not amount to a criminal act under Section 124-A of the Railway Act.

“The Hon’ble Apex court has held that the manner in which the accident is sought to be reconstructed by the Railways, that the deceased was standing at the open door of the train compartment from where he fell down, is called by the Railways itself as negligence. Now negligence of this kind which is not very uncommon on Indian trains is not the same thing as a criminal act as mentioned under section 124-A of the Railway Act. A criminal Act must have an element of malicious intent or mens-rea. Standing at the open doors of the compartment of a running train may be a negligent act, even a rash act but, without anything else, it is certainly not a criminal act. Thus, the case of the Railways must fail even after assuming everything in its favour,” the tribunal’s order copy says mentioning the Apex court’s ruling.

Mumbai: Railway Police Arrest 22-Year-Old LLB Student For Allegedly Harassing Minor Girl On CSMT-Chennai Express

The Railway Claims Tribunal reiterated that Section 124-A of the Railway Act is based on no-fault liability, mandating compensation unless the incident falls under specific exceptions such as suicide, self-inflicted injury, or intoxication. Since the Railways failed to prove that the victims' actions fit these exceptions, the tribunal ruled in favor of the victims' families.

The tribunal, after considering the evidence, thus held that the deaths fell under strict liability, meaning that the Railways are obligated to compensate the victims’ families, irrespective of fault.