words per minute
10
RaviKantSteno
00:00
Speed
On 29th January 2014 by an unknown train deceased Akash S/o Vijayrao Thakur was travelling from Nagpur to Chandur Railway station in order to go to his home. As the compartment of the train was overcrowded the deceased was standing near the door of the compartment and while travelling he fell down the running train due to sudden jerk on a Railway Station in front of signal. The deceased died on the spot. The deceased was travelling in the train with proper journey ticket purchased by his friend. Information was given by Loco Pilot to the Station Master of the Railway Station. The body of deceased was cut into pieces. The appellants, the parents of deceased filed claim before the Railway Claims Tribunal praying to grant compensation. The respondent filed its Written Statement. Learned Claims Tribunal framed issues. Appellant no.2 Vijay Uttamrao Thakur examined himself and witness Rahul Vijayrao. The Railway Claims Tribunal rejected the claim on the ground that the deceased was not a bona fide passenger and there was no untoward incident, as claimed. The Learned Counsel has submitted that the evidence of witness Rahul shows that he was friend of deceased. The deceased had come to Nagpur. On 29th January 2014 he along with the deceased and himself purchased the journey ticket of deceased and handed over to him. he has stated that the compartment in which the deceased was travelling was over-crowded. The deceased was standing in the door way of the coach. He came to know about the accident. Learned Counsel from Railway side vehemently argued that the Railway Claims Tribunal has minutely verified the documents and has come to proper conclusion that the deceased might have committed suicide. No journey ticket was found on the spot of incident. He was not a bona fide passenger. Learned Counsel has submitted that if the deceased would have fallen from the running train, he would have been thrown by the side of the track. He would not come under the wheel of train. Body was cut into pieces. This itself shows that he was ran over by train. Therefore, it is not an untoward incident. Deceased Learned Counsel has submitted that only because the body was found in two pieces, it cannot be inferred that it was suicide and not an untoward incident. Learned Counsel has further submitted that, as per evidence of witness Rahul, deceased was having journey ticket. The ticket must have been lost in the incident. It cannot be a ground for rejecting the claim in view of Judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court. It appears from the judgment of Railway Claims Tribunal that the evidence of only Railway Station was relied on. Admittedly he was not an eye witness of the incident. As per his evidence, he was informed by Loco Pilot of Train No. 12724 that dead body of an unknown person was lying in front of home signal. In the cross-examination he has admitted that he did not receive any information from any Authority that someone has committed suicide or was ran over by train while crossing the track. On perusal of the Written Statement filed by the Railways signed by Senior Circle Security Inspector, it appears that after complete investigation, it was found that the deceased was not travelling with a valid ticket. The deceased was travelling in the door of coach. Therefore, the incident took place. If the deceased would have travelling sitting in the coach, such type of incident could not have taken place. The incident took place due to negligence of the deceased himself and therefore, the Railways is not responsible.