Missing train ticket cannot defeat compensation claim after passenger’s death: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court on Friday held that a missing train ticket could not, by itself, defeat a compensation claim by the parents of a man who died after falling from the train [Sukhabhai Nanjibhai Makwana and Another v. Union of India]

A Bench of Justices Ujjal Bhuyan and Atul S Chandurkar set aside a Gujarat High Court ruling that had rejected the parents’ compensation claim after finding insufficient evidence that their son had fallen from a train.

“On preponderance of probabilities, it can be concluded that the victim was a bona fide passenger and that absence of recovery of his ticket cannot result in defeating the claim for compensation,” the Court said.

The Bench thus restored the ₹8 lakh compensation awarded by the Railway Claims Tribunal and directed the Railways to satisfy the award within 30 days.

The case arose from the death of Maheshbhai, who fell from a train between Sabarmati and Ahmedabad railway stations on September 27, 2017. He suffered serious injuries and died of them on October 31.

His parents said he had bought a ticket, but it was lost along with other belongings. In June 2022, the tribunal held that he had been a passenger who suffered an accidental fall. It awarded his parents ₹8 lakh with interest at 9 percent a year from the date of the incident until the date of its order.

The Railways challenged the award before the Gujarat High Court. In July 2025, the High Court accepted the appeal and reversed the tribunal decision, citing the absence of a ticket and details identifying the train.

Maheshbhai’s parents then approached the Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court said the father’s statement on oath that Maheshbhai had bought a ticket shifted the burden to the Railways to rebut the claim. The Bench noted that neither railway witness had checked Maheshbhai’s pockets for a ticket.

“The High Court gave undue importance to the absence of the railway ticket without taking into consideration the statement made on oath by the victim’s father and the fact that the victim had been hospitalised for a period of more than one month,” the Court said.

The Bench added that, while Maheshbhai was undergoing treatment, it was “quite unlikely that the railway ticket would have been preserved by the claimants”.

The Court also declined to rely on the Railways’ investigation report, prepared about seven months after the incident without any explanation for the delay.

Senior Advocate Nachiketa Joshi appeared for the parents. Additional Solicitor General Kanakamedala Ravindra Kumar appeared for the Railways.

[Read Judgment]