NDLI: Doli Rani Saha Vs. Union of India

Content Provider	Supreme Court of India
e-ISSN	30484839
Language	English
Access Restriction	NDLI
Subject Keyword	Absence of a ticket Notification bearing GSR 1165(E) dated 22 December 2016. Railway accident Antemortem injuries Bona fide passenger of the train Compensation Post-mortem report Report of the Investigating Officer Burden of proof Blunt force impact Presumption Margin of error
Content Type	Text
Resource Type	Law Order
Jurisdiction	India
Act(s) Referred	Railway Accidents and Untoward Incidents (compensation) Amendment Rules 1997 (0 of 1997) Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 (54 of 1987) Railways Act, 1989 (24 of 1989) Railway Accidents (compensation) Rules 1990 (0 of 1990)
Case(s) Referred	Referred Case 0 Referred Case 1 Referred Case 2
Case Type	Appeal
Court	Supreme Court of India
Disposal Nature	Appeal Disposed Off
Headnote	Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 – s. 16 – Railways Act, 1989 – s. 124A – Railway accident – Claim of compensation – Victim, if a bona fide passenger – Burden of proof – Discharge of – Victim travelling on the train and his death caused by a fall during course of his travel –Compensation claim by the victim’s sister, dismissed by the courts below – Correctness:Held: In cases where the body of the deceased is found on railway premises, the initial burden would be on the claimant, which could be discharged by filing an affidavit of the relevant facts – Once the claimant did so, the burden would then shift to the Railways – Mere absence of a ticket would not negate the claim that the deceased was a bona fide passenger – On facts, the victim’s sister duly filed an affidavit stating the facts and adverting to the report arising from the investigation conducted by the respondent, which showed that the deceased was travelling on the train and that his death was caused by a fall during the course of his travel – Burden of proof then shifted to the Railways, which was not discharged – Thus, the presumption that the deceased was a bona fide passenger on the train was not rebutted – Report of the Investigating Officer indicated the details mentioned in the post- mortem report wherein the conclusions as to the time of death are approximations – Estimation as to the time of death in the post- mortem report differs from the time at which the IO stated that the deceased fell off the train by about half a day – Margin of error of about half a day in cases of compensation is not disproportionate, where the evidence is otherwise corroborated by the material on record, which on facts, indicate that the deceased was a bona fide passenger on the train and he sustained grave injuries leading to his death, due to his fall from the train – Thus, compensation due to the victim’s sister – In case the amount so calculated is less than the amount prescribed as on the date of the grant of compensation, the claimant would be entitled to the higher of the two amounts – In 2003, the compensation payable for the death of a passenger was Rs 4,00,000 as provided under Schedule I of the Railway Accidents (Compensation) Rules 1990 – Compensation payable for the death of a passenger as on date is Rs 8,00,000 which was enhanced by a notification bearing GSR 1165(E) dated 22 December 2016 – Victim’s sister entitled to compensation quantified at Rs 8,00,000 to be paid by the respondent to the victim’s sister. [Paras 13-17, 19-21]
Judge	N/A
Neutral Citation	2024 INSC 603
Petitioner	Doli Rani Saha
Respondent	Union Of India
SCR	[2024] 8 S.C.R. 391
Judgement Date	2024-08-09
Case Number	8605

Sl.	Authority	Responsibilities	Communication Details
1	Ministry of Education (GoI), Department of Higher Education	Sanctioning Authority	https://www.education.gov.in/ict-initiatives
2	Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	Host Institute of the Project: The host institute of the project is responsible for providing infrastructure support and hosting the project	https://www.iitkgp.ac.in
3	National Digital Library of India Office, Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	The administrative and infrastructural headquarters of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in
4	Project PI / Joint PI	Principal Investigator and Joint Principal Investigators of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in Prof. Saswat Chakrabarti will be added soon
5	Website/Portal (Helpdesk)	Queries regarding NDLI and its services	support@ndl.gov.in
6	Contents and Copyright Issues	Queries related to content curation and copyright issues	content@ndl.gov.in
7	National Digital Library of India Club (NDLI Club)	Queries related to NDLI Club formation, support, user awareness program, seminar/symposium, collaboration, social media, promotion, and outreach	clubsupport@ndl.gov.in
8	Digital Preservation Centre (DPC)	Assistance with digitizing and archiving copyright-free printed books	dpc@ndl.gov.in
9	IDR Setup or Support	Queries related to establishment and support of Institutional Digital Repository (IDR) and IDR workshops	idr@ndl.gov.in

Doli Rani Saha Vs. Union of India

Please Log-in to view this content

Maharaj Singh & Ors. Vs. Karan Singh (dead) Thr. Lrs. & Ors.

Raj Rani & Anr. Vs. Kailash Chand & Anr.

Inderjeet Kaur Vs. Nirpal Singh

Ram Nath and Another Vs. Ram Nath Chhittar Mal and Others

Radhey Shyam Yadav & Anr. Etc. Vs. State of U.p. & Ors.

Pal Singh Vs. Sunder Singh (dead) By Lrs. & Ors.

Krishna Kumar Mediratta Vs. Phulchand Agarwala & Ors.

Firm Panjumal Daulatram Vs. Sakhi Gopal

1950 House Bill 0815. An Act Providing That No Restaurant Liquor License Shall Be Renewed Or Issued Except Upon Proof That The Holder Thereof Is Operating A Bona Fide Restaurant Business.

Doli Rani Saha Vs. Union of India

Doli Rani Saha Vs. Union of India

Please Log-in to view this content

Similar Documents

Maharaj Singh & Ors. Vs. Karan Singh (dead) Thr. Lrs. & Ors.

Raj Rani & Anr. Vs. Kailash Chand & Anr.

Inderjeet Kaur Vs. Nirpal Singh

Ram Nath and Another Vs. Ram Nath Chhittar Mal and Others

Radhey Shyam Yadav & Anr. Etc. Vs. State of U.p. & Ors.

Pal Singh Vs. Sunder Singh (dead) By Lrs. & Ors.

Krishna Kumar Mediratta Vs. Phulchand Agarwala & Ors.

Firm Panjumal Daulatram Vs. Sakhi Gopal

1950 House Bill 0815. An Act Providing That No Restaurant Liquor License Shall Be Renewed Or Issued Except Upon Proof That The Holder Thereof Is Operating A Bona Fide Restaurant Business.

Doli Rani Saha Vs. Union of India