Missing Ticket Is Not Proof of Ticketless Travel: Supreme Court Says Claimant’s Affidavit Can Establish Bona Fide Passenger Status for Railway Accident Compensation

Case Name: Lata v. Union of India & Another

Date of Judgment: 17 July 2026

Citation: 2026 INSC 715

Bench: Justice Sanjay Karol and Justice Nongmeikapam Kotiswar Singh

Held: The Supreme Court held that non-recovery of a railway ticket from the body or belongings of a deceased passenger does not, by itself, establish that the person was travelling without a valid ticket. In a claim under Section 124A of the Railways Act, 1989, the claimant may discharge the initial burden of proving bona fide passenger status through an affidavit setting out the relevant facts, after which the burden shifts to the Railways. Such claims must be decided on the preponderance of probabilities and not on the criminal-law standard of proof beyond reasonable doubt. The beneficial and no-fault compensation regime cannot be defeated through a narrow or hyper-technical approach.

Summary: The appellant’s husband, Chandrakant Thakkar, died after falling from a running train while travelling from Raipur to Ahmedabad. His travel bag, which allegedly contained the railway ticket, could not be traced. The Railway Claims Tribunal accepted that the death resulted from an “untoward incident” but rejected compensation because the deceased was not proved to be a bona fide passenger. The Madhya Pradesh High Court affirmed that decision.

The Supreme Court observed that Section 124A creates no-fault liability for death or injury caused by an untoward incident, including the accidental fall of a passenger from a train. As a beneficial provision, it must receive a liberal and purposive interpretation that advances accessible and expeditious compensation rather than obstructing it through procedural technicalities.

The Court relied upon Union of India v. Rina Devi and reiterated that the absence of a ticket does not automatically negate a compensation claim. The appellant had filed an affidavit stating that the deceased had purchased a valid ticket and kept it in the missing travel bag. There was no dispute that he was travelling on the train, had fallen from it and died, nor was the case covered by any statutory exception such as suicide, self-inflicted injury, intoxication or criminal conduct. The affidavit was therefore sufficient to discharge the claimant’s initial burden.

The Court also cautioned that the Railways, as an instrumentality of a welfare State, should not adopt a restrictive approach in such claims. It noted that railway authorities have corresponding duties relating to ticket verification, passenger safety, prevention of overcrowding and ensuring that passengers do not travel on footboards or in unsafe conditions.

Decision: The Supreme Court allowed the appeal and set aside the judgments of the Railway Claims Tribunal and the High Court. It awarded the appellant compensation of ₹8 lakh, payable within four weeks. In case of default, the amount would carry 8% interest from the date of filing of the claim petition.