Boarding an overcrowded train and sustaining injuries would not disentitle someone from claiming compensation - Bombay HC

CASE: Nitin Hundiwala vs Union of India

COURT: Justice Bharati Dangre of Bombay High Court

SECTION 124A OF THE ACT (defined below): Compensation on account of untoward incident

Earlier this month, the Bombay High Court held that under Section 124A of the Railways Act of 1989 ("Act"), the calculated risk of boarding an overcrowded local train would not amount to a "criminal act". Thus, if a passenger attempts to enter an overcrowded train but is pushed by other passengers sustaining injuries, such a person would be entitled to claim compensation against the Railways.

FACTS

Nitin Hundiwala, a worker in suburban Vikhroli, boarded an overcrowded Virar train from the Dadar Station. He fell from the moving train resulting in injuries and disability. Hundiwala approached the Railway Claims Tribunal ("RCT"), seeking compensation of Rs 4 Lakh from the Railways. However, in July 2013, RCT rejected his claim but accepted Railway's argument that Hundiwala had resorted to an "imprudent and criminal act" of boarding a running train.

HELD

The Court rejected the finding of the RCT that Hundiwala was not a bona fide passenger as no valid ticket was found while he was being taken to the hospital since the applicant had validated his tickets through a Coupon Validating Machine.

The Court further held that such an injury would be covered 'untoward incident' u/c 123(c)(2) of the Act. In view of the same, it was ordered that the Railways pay an amount of ₹3.10 lakh to a 75-year-old man.