[S.123 Railways Act] Death After Assault By Railway Police For Protesting Wife's Molestation In Train Is 'Untoward Incident': Jharkhand High Court

While setting aside the judgment of the Railway Claims Tribunal which dismissed the claim of the petitioner, the single judge bench of Justice Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi held that the incident would amount to an 'untoward incident' under Section 123(c) of the Railways Act and thus, the widow would be entitled to compensation under Section 124A of the Act.

"The deceased was assaulted pursuant to protest of molestation of his wife while travelling in a train, certainly incident will come within the meaning of untoward incident."

It added, "In a country where crores of people who travel by railway trains since everybody cannot afford traveling by air or in a private car by giving a restrictive and narrow meaning to the expression it will amount to deprive a large number of victims of train accidents (particularly poor and middle class people) from getting compensation under the Railways Act."

The widow's claim was dismissed by the Railway Claims Tribunal on the ground that FSL report stated that aluminium phosphide, a strong gastro intestinal irritant poison was detected in deceased's viscera.

In appeal, the High Court found that the post mortem report of deceased is crystal clear that death has occurred due to injury (swelling and bruises on the head) inflicted during the assault. It further noted that the deceased and appellant were bona fide passengers. Moreover, two higher officials of the police had accepted the guilt of four police personnel based on CB-CID inquiry.

It added,

"There is no dispute that under the Act there is statutory liability of the railway administration for death and /or injury of a passenger due to any untoward incident while travelling in train. Besides, it is a breach of common law duty of reasonable case which lies upon all carriers including the railways. The standard of case is high and strict. Where there is a complete dereliction of duty of railway officials which resulted in a precious life been taken away rendering the guarantee under Article 21 of the Constitution illusory."

Case Title: Mrs. Sangita Devi and Ors. v. Union of India through General Manager, SER

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Jha) 6

Coram: Justice Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi

Click Here to Read/Download Judgment