[Accident compensation] ID proof not mandatory for season ticket holder in Mumbai local to prove he is bonafide passenger: Bombay High Court

A passenger in a Mumbai local train holding a valid season ticket will be considered a bonafide passenger when it comes to claiming compensation for accident suffered during the journey and non-production of separate identity proof would not render the season ticket invalid, the Bombay High Court recently held [Harish Chandra Damodar v. Union of India]..Single judge bench of Justice Sandeep K Shinde said that the instructions relied upon by the Railways in this regard, cannot be said to be ‘mandatory’ and would not render, proper season ticket, automatically invalid for non-production of identity card."Passenger producing proper season ticket without, identify card, ipso-facto, would not render season ticket, improper and/or invalid, unless, it is proved that passenger was using season ticket, that was issued in the name of another person," the Court said. The decision came in an appeal challenging Railway Claims Tribunal's order which rejected compensation to the appellant Harish Damodar who had sustained injuries sustained after an accidental fall from the train due to heavy rush of passengers. While rejecting compensation, the tribunal had observed that Damodar's injuries did not seem to be from an 'untoward incident' but seemed 'self-inflicted'.The tribunal had also concluded that the appellant was not a bonafide passenger as he had not carried an identity proof along with his monthly season ticket and hence it was considered that he did not have a proper pass. .The question before the High Court was whether, for want of identity card, season ticket carried and possessed by the applicant-passenger, would be invalid?The Central government had placed reliance on instructions issued by the Railway Ministry which mandated that it is necessary for the passenger to produce the identity card along with the season ticket failing which the season ticket will be invalid and passenger will be treated without ticket.The Court, however, said that non-production of identity card along with the season ticket by a passenger, who had sustained injury due to accidental fall, itself would not render valid season ticket, invalid.In this regard the Court said,"First reason is that, applicant was travelling with valid and proper season ticket. Therefore, he was “Passenger” within the meaning of Section 2(29) of the Act. Second reason is, instructions relied on by the Railways, cannot be said to be ‘mandatory’ and therefore would not render, proper season ticket, automatically invalid for non-production of identity card."Further, in terms of provisions of Section 54 of the Railways Act of 1989, every passenger shall, on demand by any railway servant present his “pass” or “ticket” to such railway servant for examination during the journey. Therefore, passenger producing proper season ticket without, identify card, ipso-facto, would not render season ticket, improper and/or invalid, unless, it is proved that passenger was using season ticket, that was issued in the name of another person, the Court explained. Although Section 53 of the Act prohibits transfer of ‘certain tickets’ however, it was not respondent’s case that, season ticket produced by the applicant was issued in the name of another person."Appellant had produced the valid season ticket bearing his signature and also journey extension tickets, which bore season ticket no.62490200. The signature of the appellant on season ticket, was not disputed by the Railways. Moreover, season ticket and the journey extension tickets, were recovered, from the appellant while removing him at Hospital. In the circumstances, non-production of Identity Card along with season ticket, itself would not render proper season ticket, invalid," the Court ruled. .The Court, therefore, directed the tribunal to decide the compensation claim of the appellant in terms of the Railway Accidents and Untoward Incidents (Compensation) Rules preferably before July of this year. Damodar was directed to appear before the Mumbai bench of the tribunal for hearing on June 10. .[Read Order]