Mumbai, Dec 09: The Bombay High Court, while lamenting the plight of Mumbaikars who endure long commutes on overcrowded suburban trains, has ruled that passengers who stand near the train door during peak hours, risking life to make their way to work, cannot be deemed negligent in case of an accident. Such behavior cannot be termed as negligence in the event of any untoward incident, the court emphasized.
Compensation Upheld for Victim’s Family
Upholding the compensation awarded to the family of a man who died in a railway accident, the court refused to accept the railway authority’s contention that the accident was caused by the victim’s negligent behavior, as he was standing on the footboard near the train’s door while traveling.
Appeal by Railways Rejected
The High Court made these observations while hearing an appeal filed by the Union government challenging a December 2009 order of the Railway Claims Tribunal, which granted compensation to the victim’s family.
2005 Fatal Fall Incident
On October 28, 2005, the man fell from the train while traveling from Bhayandar to Marine Lines on the Western Railway. He succumbed to his injuries a few days later.
Crowded Local Trains Considered in Ruling
Dismissing the railways’ contention, Justice Jitendra Jain noted that a Virar–Churchgate train is extremely crowded, especially during the morning peak hours, and it is very difficult for any passenger to enter the compartment, especially at Bhayandar railway station.
Situation Remains Unchanged, Says HC
“This is a situation even today. Therefore, to contend that a passenger is negligent while standing near the door cannot be accepted. If a person has to travel for his work and it is very difficult to enter inside the compartment, the passenger has no choice but to risk his life by standing near the door,” the court said.
“This reality cannot be brushed away,” it added.
Law Does Not Exclude Door-Standing Incidents
The judge also highlighted that there is no provision in the law that states that if a person is standing near the door due to heavy rush and falls down, such an incident would not be covered under the definition of an ‘untoward incident.’
Victim Proved Bona Fide Passenger
Moreover, the railways claimed that the victim was not a bona fide passenger, as no ticket or pass was found on his body at the time of the accident. However, the victim’s widow produced a local pass along with the identity card before the tribunal. The court stated that this proves the victim was a bona fide passenger at the time of the accident.
Also Watch:
Pass Not Carried That Day Doesn’t Cancel Rights
“The genuineness of the local pass stands proven. There could be various reasons why, on the date of the accident, the deceased may have forgotten the pass at home, but that would not disentitle the compensation amount to the dependents,” it added.
Appeal Dismissed
Noting that there was no infirmity in the tribunal’s decision, the High Court disposed of the railways’ appeal.
To get details on exclusive and budget-friendly property deals in Mumbai & surrounding regions, do visit: https://budgetproperties.in/
