Mumbai: Bombay high court has directed the railways to grant Rs 80,000 compensation to a man who fell off a running train while sitting near the door.The Central Railway said no compensation could be awarded as it was a “self-inflicted injury”, which under the rules excludes compensation.The passenger, Rohidas Kumavat, was travelling by Guwahati Express train from Manmad to Jalgaon. When the train was entering Jalgaon station, he said, “due to the rush, his hands slipped” and he fell from the running train, leading to a head and shoulder injury. The train had no halt at Jalgaon.Justice Jitendra Jain, said long-distance trains have no display board about halts, “if a person boards a train and train does not have halt at the railway station where he wants to de-board, no fault can be attributed to such a passenger”.But Justice Jain said, “It is advisable to wait till the train halts at the next railway station and pay necessary fine for travelling beyond the destination for which the ticket was purchased,'” adding, “I am conscious that at that point of time, a human being may take steps to risk the life, but it is at that point of time that test of mental balance is tested. This is required in the larger interest of the dependents of the passenger. The railway authorities should introduce a public announcement system like that in Vande Bharat train, in all the trains to reduce such incidents.'”The Supreme Court said in 2010 if a person sitting or standing near the door accidentally falls down, it would not be a case of suicide, self-inflicted injury, criminal act, etc.The HC said it was possible the passenger thought the train would halt at Jalgaon and, on realising it wasn’t, an attempt to alight would naturally lead to “some injury”.Justice Jain said he could have waited for the next railway station to de-board the moving train, but at that point of time, a person loses his mental balance and in panic tries to de-board the moving train without there being any intention of “self-inflicted injury”.“No person in such a situation would do any act to impose upon him ‘self-inflicted injury’ and in some cases, it is also possible that he may go unscathed,” added the HC.
