Citation: Sukhabhai Nanjibhai Makwana and Another v. Union of India 2026 INSC 1056.
This Supreme Court judgment relates to an appeal filed by the parents of a young man who tragically died after falling from a crowded train, ruling that the Railway Claims Tribunal’s original award of compensation must be restored because the family successfully proved he was a genuine passenger despite his ticket being lost during the incident.
In railway accident compensation claims, the initial burden on the claimant to prove they were a bona fide passenger is successfully discharged through an affidavit or sworn statement detailing the purchase of a ticket, and the mere absence of a physical ticket or a delayed official investigation report cannot be used by the Railways to defeat the claim once that initial burden shifts to them.
The initial burden shifted to the Railways the moment the victim’s father discharged his duty by filing a claim application and giving a sworn statement on oath that his son had purchased a valid ticket which was unfortunately lost along with other personal belongings during the accident and subsequent month-long hospitalization. According to established legal principles, once the claimants establish this initial foundation through an affidavit or relevant facts, the burden legally shifts to the Railways to disprove it, which they failed to do because their staff neglected to check the victim’s pockets for a ticket and could not produce a timely or valid rebuttal investigation report.
On September 27, 2017, the appellants’ son, Maheshbhai, was travelling in the general compartment of a train from Sabarmati to Ahmedabad when a sudden jerk caused him to fall out due to a heavy crowd. He suffered severe injuries and, after spending more than a month receiving medical treatment in the hospital, he unfortunately passed away on October 31, 2017.
His parents filed a compensation claim under the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, which the Tribunal initially granted, awarding them 8 lakhs with interest. However, the Gujarat High Court reversed this decision upon an appeal by the Union of India, stating there was insufficient proof of his fall or that he was a ticket-holder, which led the parents to bring the case before the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court held that the High Court was wrong to set aside the compensation, ruling that the victim’s parents had successfully proven he was a genuine passenger through their sworn statements, and the Railways could not use the missing ticket or their own delayed investigation report to deny compensation.