Missing train ticket cannot by itself defeat railway accident compensation: SC

The Supreme Court has again said that railway accident victims should not be denied compensation just because a ticket was not found. On 25 September 2026, in Sukhabhai Nanjibhai Makwana & Anr. v. Union of India (2026 INSC 1056), a bench of Justice Ujjal Bhuyan and Justice Atul S. Chandurkar restored the Railway Claims Tribunal's award of ₹8 lakh with interest to the parents of a passenger who died.

Background

In September 2017, the passenger was travelling in a general compartment towards Surat via Ahmedabad when he suffered serious injuries. He was in hospital for more than a month and died on 31 October 2017. The Railway Claims Tribunal awarded compensation, but the High Court later rejected the claim, giving weight to the fact that no ticket was recovered.

What the Supreme Court held

• Whether someone was a bona fide passenger is decided on the preponderance of probabilities, not proof beyond reasonable doubt.
• The father had stated on oath that his son bought a ticket, and the son spent a long time in hospital, which made it likely the ticket was lost. The High Court gave undue importance to the missing ticket and did not properly consider this evidence.
• Not recovering a ticket cannot defeat a compensation claim when the other evidence shows genuine travel.
• The Court directed the Railways to pay the award within 30 days.

Why it matters

Under the Railways Act, 1989, the Railways must pay compensation for deaths and injuries in "untoward incidents", such as falling from a train, regardless of fault. Tickets are often lost in accidents, during rescue or in hospital. This ruling confirms that families should not lose compensation because of a missing ticket alone.

If you need to file a claim

• Claims are filed before the Railway Claims Tribunal.
• Keep any evidence of travel you have, such as journey details, statements from co-passengers, police and hospital records, and digital payment records.
• An affidavit from a family member about the ticket purchase can be relevant evidence.