Is any action liable against passengers who travel on the roofs of the trains?

Background

The appellant claimed that according to a news item published in Bhaskar of 12th July 2011 the were large number of passengers on the roof of the particular train and that the train was allowed to move from the station thereby violating safety provisions, as given in the Railways Act. In this connection he wanted to know the names of the persons who were traveling and whether any fine was imposed upon them, under whose permission the train proceeded from the station when people were sitting on the roof, details of compensation paid to injured and to families of those traveling on the roof who died due to their collision with foot over bridge. He also asked for certified copy of Indian Railway Act 1989 Para 156 with modification or amendment made. The Public Information Officer (PIO) provided point wise information as received from the Railway Protection Force, Jaipur division. The First Appellate Authority (FAA) upheld the decision of PIO.

View of CIC 

The respondent submitted that since those who travel on the roof of the train are unauthorized travelers, their names and the family details are not maintained by the Public Authority. He further clarified that there is no provision for payment of compensation since such passengers traveling on the roof of the train are unauthorized travelers. He also stated that on that particular day, no one traveling on the roof of the train was sent to jail nor has any fine been imposed on anyone. The respondent said that the names of various officials responsible for allowing the train to move from the station and all the above information was already provided to the appellant. The appellant however denied having received the same. The Central Information Commission directed the PIO to provide all the information once again to the appellant along with the statement available in respect of numbers of travelers who had died due to collisions with foot over bridges. If no such information is available, the appellant should be informed about its non-availability.

Citation: Shri Shripal Jain v. North Western Railway in File No. CIC/AD/A/2012/000120, CIC/AD/A/2012/000259, CIC/AD/A/2012/000246