Supreme Court Urges Railways To Tackle Overcrowding, Says 'Second Class Passenger' Term Offends Constitutional Spirit

The Bench of Justice Sanjay Karol and Justice Nongmeikapam Kotiswar Singh made these observations while allowing an appeal filed by the widow of a man who died after falling from a moving train in 2015. Setting aside the orders of the Railway Claims Tribunal and the Madhya Pradesh High Court, the Court awarded compensation of ₹8 lakh, holding that the non-recovery of the deceased's ticket could not, by itself, defeat a genuine claim under the Railways Act.

Referring to incidents such as the Mumbai suburban train accident in June 2025, the New Delhi railway station stampede during the Maha Kumbh rush, and other overcrowding-related accidents, the Court observed that these tragedies highlight persistent concerns regarding passenger safety.

AoR Shweta Priyadarshini appeared for the petitioner in this matter, as Legal Aid Counsel.

Examining the Indian Railway Commercial Manual, the Court noted that detailed operational guidelines already require station masters, guards and ticket-checking staff to regulate overcrowding, distribute passengers across coaches, alert upcoming stations about overcrowded trains and arrange additional coaches where necessary.

"The forethought is clearly visible, but the execution leaves much to be desired," the Bench remarked.

The Court also suggested that the Railways consider increasing manpower by recruiting more young people to ensure effective implementation of these safety measures.

"While we are in the era of modernisation, we may suggest that it may be only felicitous both for the Organisation and the country as a whole if the youth of today are employed by the Organisation, not only giving them a stable source of livelihood but also preserving human lives," the judgment observed.

At the same time, the Court emphasised that passengers also bear responsibility for their own safety and should avoid taking risks while boarding or travelling in overcrowded trains.

The Bench further took exception to the terminology used in Railway manuals referring to travellers as "second class passengers."

"While it is ostensibly linked to the expenditure incurred by the passenger to travel, we may suggest that the class connotation be attached to the coach and not to the passenger, in recognition of the history of class divisions in our country and the same being offensive to the spirit of the Constitution of India," the Court observed.

On the facts of the case, the widow had consistently maintained that her husband's journey ticket was kept in his travel bag, which went missing after the accident. The Court held that under the beneficial no-fault liability regime contained in Section 124A of the Railways Act, the claimant had discharged the initial burden by filing an affidavit asserting that the deceased possessed a valid ticket.

Holding that the mere loss of the ticket during the accident could not negate the deceased's status as a bona fide passenger, the Court directed the Railways to pay ₹8 lakh as compensation within four weeks, failing which the amount would carry interest at 8% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition.