The Bombay High Court has set aside a 2011 order of the Railway Claims Tribunal and ruled that a railway employee travelling on a valid free pass cannot be treated as an unauthorised passenger merely because journey details were not filled in. The court awarded compensation of ₹3 lakh to the widow of the deceased employee, who lost his life after falling from a moving train.
Justice Jitendra Jain delivered the judgment on January 19, 2026, holding that the Tribunal had taken an unduly technical view while rejecting the claim.
Background of the Case
The case arose from a tragic incident in which a Central Railway employee fell from an express train between Khandala and Monkey Hill and died on the spot. His wife, Seetabai Pandharinath Temghare, later approached the Railway Claims Tribunal seeking compensation under the Railways Act for an “untoward incident.”
Read also:- Externment Affects Fundamental Rights, Says Kerala HC; Cuts Police-Imposed One-Year Ban to Six Months
In November 2011, the Tribunal dismissed her claim, reasoning that the deceased was not a “bona fide passenger” since he had not filled in travel details such as date of journey on his free railway pass.
Challenging this finding, the widow moved the Bombay High Court in appeal.
Court’s Observations
The High Court noted that several crucial facts were not in dispute. First, the deceased was a railway employee. Second, the fall from the train was accidental and qualified as an “untoward incident.” Third, the free second-class pass issued to him was valid on the date of the accident.
The only question before the court was whether failure to fill in journey particulars on the pass automatically made the deceased an unauthorised traveller.
Read also:- Kerala HC Rejects Doctors’ Plea Against Physiotherapists, Allows Use of ‘Dr’ Prefix
Rejecting this approach, the court observed,
“Merely because an employee holding a valid pass fails to mention the details on the pass, it cannot be held that he was travelling without a valid authority.”
Justice Jain explained that endorsement on a pass becomes necessary only when a railway employee opts for reserved travel. In this case, there was no evidence to show that the deceased was travelling in a reserved compartment.
“There is no reason why a railway employee carrying a valid pass would deliberately travel unauthorised, especially when the travel itself is free,” the judge noted.
Read also:- Religious Faith Cannot Block Public Roads: Madras High Court Orders Removal of Chennai Roadside Shrine
While holding that the deceased was a bona fide passenger, the court also took note of lapses in maintaining proper pass details. Referring to earlier High Court rulings, the judge held that such omissions justified a reduction in compensation.
The bench observed that although the claim could not be rejected outright, the incomplete use of the pass created some doubt about strict compliance with rules. Exercising judicial discretion, the court fixed compensation at ₹3 lakh instead of the full statutory amount.
Final Decision
Allowing the appeal, the High Court quashed the Tribunal’s 2011 order and directed the Railways to pay ₹3 lakh with 6% annual interest from the date of the accident, subject to a maximum cap of ₹8 lakh. The amount is to be distributed equally among the dependents within eight weeks after submission of bank details.
“The appeal stands allowed in these terms,” Justice Jain concluded.
Case Title: Seetabai Pandharinath Temghare v. Union of India
Case Number: First Appeal No. 315 of 2012
Date of Judgment: 19 January 2026
Advocates:
- For Appellant: Mr. Sainand Chaugule
- For Respondent: Mr. T. J. Pandian with Mr. Gautam Modanwal
