The Delhi High Court denied requests from individuals affected by a February 15 stampede to join a PIL, advising them to pursue personal legal remedies instead for compensation claims.
New Delhi: The Delhi High Court on Wednesday refused to allow persons, who had missed their train due to the February 15 stampede, to be impleaded as parties in a PIL concerning the tragic incident at the New Delhi Railway Station.
A bench comprising Chief Justice D K Upadhyaya and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela advised them to pursue “personal” legal remedies such as a lawsuit for redressal of their grievances, including claims for damages.
The counsel for the applicants stated that their request for a refund of their train tickets after having “escaped” the stampede was denied by the authorities. However, the court responded:
“That is a personal cause of action. Take recourse to remedies under the law. Why should we permit you to intervene in this matter? It is a public interest litigation (PIL). You are people who say they could not board the train and are entitled to compensation. That gives rise to a personal course of action.”
The court clarified that the PIL’s focus was on enforcing legal provisions for crowd and passenger management and had “nothing to do with the incident” itself.
“It will open a floodgate. We will not be doing justice to the case. We see what you are saying. It will give rise to personal tort, not a PIL… We will not allow you to implead here,”
the bench stated.
The court permitted the applicants to withdraw their plea while granting them the liberty to take appropriate legal action.
The February 15 stampede claimed 18 lives and left 15 injured at the overcrowded New Delhi Railway Station, where thousands of passengers were waiting to board trains for Prayagraj, where the Maha Kumbh is underway.
Petitioner Arth Vidhi stated in its PIL that the tragic incident revealed “gross mismanagement” and administrative failure. On February 19, the court directed the Railways to examine the fixing of maximum passenger capacity and the sale of platform tickets—issues raised in the PIL—and sought an affidavit detailing the decisions taken on these matters.
The case will continue as the court reviews railway management policies to prevent such tragedies in the future.
FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE
