Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

12. Of course, Section 101 of the Evidence Act places the burden of proof on the person, who desires any Court to give judgment as to any legal right or liability dependent on the existence of the facts, which he asserts. But in the case of the railway accident where a passenger has died, the claimants would find it extremely difficult, if not impossible, to prove certain facts, which are beyond their reach and control. Since the claimants may not know whether the deceased had purchased a valid ticket or not, they would not be in a position to prove the fact that the deceased was a bona fide passenger. However, since the Railway appoints ticket collector on its behalf to check the valid ticket of the passengers, the Railway has a mechanism for finding out and discovering whether the deceased was a bona fide passenger or not. Since the passenger is presumed to be innocent, a legal presumption can be drawn that he had followed the law and that he had, indeed, purchased a valid ticket prior to boarding the train. Considering the fact that there is an equal presumption in favour of the Railway that the railway officers would have discharged his duty of checking the ticket, in a bona fide manner, it can be presumed that the ticket collector would have examined whether the deceased possesses a valid ticket or not. Therefore, the Railway has a means through which they can easily prove that the deceased was not a bona fide passenger. However, the burden of proof lies on the Railway Administration to lead evidence and to prove that the deceased was not a bona fide passenger.