sustain a claim before a Railway Claims Tribunal, it is mandatory to prove, at least, prima facie that the deceased was a bona fide passenger. Towards the discharge of the said burden, evidence was adduced by AW2 who had stated that he saw the deceased purchasing one ticket and boarding the 902 Dn Passenger Training at Naharkotia Railway Station. The ticket, as such has not been produced. In a given case, it may not be possible to retrieve the ticket, more so in death case. However, it is required to examine as to whether the said burden was discharged with regard to the aspect of the deceased being a bona fide passenger. The said AW2, in his cross-examination, had admitted that he was related to the deceased. However, that aspect will not make his evidence less credential if he, otherwise meets the other requirements. The said deposition has to be balanced with the other materials. In the instant case, there is a specific report marked as ‘R1’ as per which, no ticket was issued on that particular date from Naharkotia to Borhat which was claimed on behalf of the appellant-claimant. In view of such rebuttal evidence which was not contested, it is difficult to come to a concrete conclusion regarding the aspect of the deceased being a bona fide passenger in favour of the claimant. Therefore, this Court is required to look into the other materials on record.
