HC denies compensation claim to man who blamed double amputation on railway accident

New Delhi: Delhi High Court has rejected a double amputee’s claim for compensation from the railways. The man, Tulsi Das, claimed that his injuries had happened because of a fall from a moving train. The court, however, said that there was no proof of “bonafide travel”.The high court raised doubts about the “foundational facts relating to the manner of occurrence” of the man’s injuries. It said that these details “remain unsubstantiated”.The court upheld the Railway Claims Tribunal’s decision to reject the plea for compensation as it transpired that Das was neither a “bona fide” passenger, nor were his injuries the result of any “untoward incident” as defined under the Railways Act, 1989.Das claimed he had boarded Malwa Express from Sonipat station on March 25, 2015, for travelling to Jhansi on a valid second-class ticket. Due to the rush of passengers, he accidentally fell, when the train was between Sonipat and New Delhi railway stations. Das said that he suffered grievous injuries, leading to the amputation of both his arms from below the elbows.Though he had purchased a valid ticket, he lost it at the time of the incident, Das said, and argued that the non-recovery of a ticket cannot be the sole indicator to declare that he was not a passenger.The tribunal rejected his claim, citing an unexplained time gap between the alleged time of the fall and when the information about it reached police. It also pointed out that no journey ticket was found and the explanation regarding its loss was unconvincing, particularly when other belongings were found to be intact.The court too flagged these “inconsistencies” and noted that Das had claimed he fell near Sadar Bazar in Delhi but the MLC prepared at Lok Nayak Hospital records the place of accident as platform 10 of Old Delhi Railway Station.“Admittedly, the said train does not pass through the Old Delhi Station and instead runs via New Delhi Railway Station. Therefore, the inconsistency between the alleged place of occurrence of the incident, and as recorded in the medical records, goes to the root of the matter and casts serious doubt on the appellant’s version of bona fide travel,” Justice Manoj Ohri said.The court also noted that information regarding the incident came at 1.30 am, while Das claimed that he fell in the evening at 6.30 pm, when the train would have crossed the Sadar Bazar section.“This reflects a gap of nearly seven hours between the alleged time of the incident and the receipt of information by the police, and thereafter admitting him to the hospital, making it difficult to accept that a person sustaining such serious injuries would have remained unattended for such a prolonged period and survived. The said unexplained delay, particularly in a case involving grievous injuries of such a nature which resulted in double amputation of both the hands, is a significant circumstance which cannot be overlooked,” the court concluded.