Similarly, in this process, the deceased getting stuck in any part of the train after fall from the running train cannot be ruled out. If this happens, then the person can come under the train and sustain the injuries of the nature found on the person of the deceased. There is no eye witness to the incident. In the absence of any categorical report, by the loco pilot, of the run over of any passenger at the spot of the incident, at the relevant time, the possibility of the deceased falling from a moving train and getting under the wheels of the train cannot be ruled out. In my view, the learned Member of the Tribunal was required to take care while appreciating the evidence. The report of DRM concludes that the deceased might have died due to a fall from the running train. The DRM has concluded that at the time of his fall, the deceased might have been standing at the door of the compartment or sitting at the footboard of the train. In view of this, conclusion drawn by the DRM, on the basis of the available investigation papers as well as the result of his own inquiry, the learned Member was required to record the cogent reasons to discard this report. In the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that this finding of fact arrived at by the Member of the Tribunal cannot be sustained. It is not possible to accept the case of the railway that the deceased was run over by any train. If the deceased was run over by any train at
