After a prolonged legal battle spanning 16 years, the Calcutta High Court has awarded compensation to a widow in a railway untoward incident involving her husband’s fatal fall from a moving train, setting aside the railway claims tribunal’s rejection of the claim.The court held that families cannot be denied relief merely for their inability to produce eyewitnesses to a loved one’s fatal death.Justice Biswaroop Chowdhury awarded the family compensation of Rs four lakh along with interest at six per cent per annum from the date of filing the claim case, and directed the authorities to make the payment within eight weeks from the date of communication of this order. “In the case of railway untoward incident when family members or friends of the victim do not travel with the victim there is no scope for the victims family to examine eye witness thus police Report has to be relied In the event Police Report inspires confidence the same should be accepted, to award compensation,” the May 22 order noted. Justice Biswaroop Chowdhury awarded compensation to the widow applicant whose husband had been in a train accident.‘Death during train journey’On July 25, 2010, the husband of the applicant was travelling from Barhampur to Sealdah to fetch gangajal on the head of lord Shiva from Sherafulli, having a valid second-class railway ticket. Due to overcrowding pressure and a sudden jerk, he accidentally fell from the running train between Krishnanagar City junction and Badkulla station, and died on the spot.Two people witnessed the incident, and a police case was registered at Krishnagar GRPS.The Union of India Railway Authority filed a written objection and denied the allegation, and contested the case.Both parties framed issues and produced evidence, and after consideration, the judge of the Railway Claims Tribunal dismissed the claim petition on February 8, 2011, stating that the alleged eyewitnesses were neither produced nor examined.The tribunal held that there was no cogent evidence to establish that the applicant’s husband had fallen from the train and died due to the injuries sustained.Also Read | ‘Man’s duty to maintain wife, children even by doing physical labour’: Delhi High Court‘Accidental death, no foul play’The Calcutta High Court took note of the post-mortem report that stated the death was accidental in nature and that no foul play was suspected, and from the statements of witnesses that the injuries sustained due to falling from a train led to his death.In cases involving railway untoward incidents, family members or friends often do not travel with the victim and therefore may not be able to produce eyewitnesses, and in such circumstances, reliance has to be placed on the police report; if the police report inspires confidence, it should be accepted for awarding compensation, the Calcutta High Court noted.The court emphasised that the railway authority is “State” under Article 12 of the Constitution, it was duty-bound to collect and place relevant evidence regarding the recovery of a dead body from the railway tracks, so that genuine claims are allowed, and the frivolous claims are rejected.Story continues below this adThe court ruled that the applicant was entitled to compensation of Rs 4 lakh along with interest at 6 per cent per annum from the date of filing the claim case till the date of this order, and directed the authorities to make the payment within eight weeks.Also Raed | Two women in live-in relationship: Why court ordered immediate police protection without checking risk levels‘Untoward incident’Advocates S N Shukul, Sagnik Chatterjee, and Sayan Mukherjee, on behalf of the petitioner, submitted that the applicant had claimed under Section 124A of the Railways Act, 1989, before the Railway Claims Tribunal seeking compensation for her husband’s accidental death, which was constituted as an “untoward incident” under Section 123(c)(2) of the Act.It was argued that the inquest report prepared by the police clearly established that the applicant’s husband died by falling from the train; the post-mortem report also recorded that the death occurred due to shock and haemorrhage caused by ante-mortem injuries that appeared accidental in nature.Chatterjee also informed the court that the applicant’s husband had boarded the train with a valid ticket, which was collected as evidence during the police investigation. Story continues below this adThe counsel submitted that the discrepancy in the name of the applicant’s husband was insignificant, as it was a clear mistake at the end of the police authorities who prepared the report, but despite all other personal details showing that the report was concerning the applicant’s husband. The counsel on behalf of his client further submitted that the railway authorities deliberately failed to produce the divisional railway manager (DRM) report before the tribunal to suppress the facts relating to the accident.