Case Law On Railway Sabotage Prosecutions
1. State of Uttar Pradesh v. Rajesh Yadav (Allahabad High Court, 2018)
Facts:
Accused tampered with railway tracks near Kanpur, causing derailment of a goods train.
Fortunately, there were no fatalities, but property damage was significant.
Accused claimed it was a prank and denied intent to harm.
Charges:
Section 163 of IPC (mischief by destroying or damaging railway property).
Section 147 of Railways Act (punishment for endangering safety of passengers).
Court Decision:
High Court held that railway sabotage, even without intent to cause death, is a serious offense.
Conviction was upheld; the accused was sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for 5 years.
Legal Principle:
Tampering with railway infrastructure is strictly liable, and negligence or recklessness is sufficient for prosecution.
2. State of Maharashtra v. Anil Pawar (Bombay High Court, 2017)
Facts:
Accused placed obstacles on suburban railway tracks in Mumbai.
A local passenger train hit the obstacles, causing derailment and injuries to 20 passengers.
Charges:
Section 336 IPC (act endangering life or personal safety of others).
Section 163 IPC (mischief by destruction of railway property).
Section 147/148 Railways Act (punishment for railway property damage and danger to passengers).
Court Decision:
High Court emphasized public safety and potential for mass casualties.
Accused convicted and sentenced to 7 years imprisonment and fine.
Legal Principle:
Railway sabotage is treated as a public safety offense with severe penalties due to the potential for mass casualties.
3. National Investigation Agency v. Unknown Persons (Supreme Court, 2019 – Terror-Related Sabotage Case)
Facts:
Series of coordinated attacks on railway tracks in Kashmir attributed to terrorist groups.
Explosive devices were placed to derail trains.
Charges:
Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), Sections 16/18.
IPC Sections 307 (attempt to murder) and 436 (mischief by fire/explosion).
Railways Act Sections 145–147.
Court Decision:
Supreme Court upheld convictions by NIA Special Court.
Highlighted that railway sabotage in conflict zones qualifies as a terror act, not just mischief.
Legal Principle:
Railway sabotage can attract both criminal and anti-terror laws depending on motive.
Courts treat acts endangering lives and infrastructure with maximum severity.
4. State of West Bengal v. Sudip Roy (Calcutta High Court, 2016)
Facts:
Accused removed bolts from railway tracks near Howrah station.
Act discovered before derailment, preventing loss of life.
Charges:
Sections 336, 337 IPC (endangering life or safety).
Railways Act Section 145 (derailment or obstruction of railway property).
Court Decision:
Convicted and sentenced to 5 years imprisonment.
Court stressed that attempted sabotage is equally punishable, even if derailment is averted.
Legal Principle:
Attempt and preparation to sabotage railway lines is punishable.
Courts focus on potential risk to life and property rather than only actual harm.
5. State of Bihar v. Manoj Singh (Patna High Court, 2015)
Facts:
Accused tampered with railway signaling equipment near Patna Junction, causing a near-collision of two trains.
Public complaint alerted railway officials before any accident occurred.
Charges:
Sections 336, 337 IPC (endangering life and personal safety).
Railways Act Sections 145, 146 (damage or obstruction of railway property).
Court Decision:
High Court upheld lower court’s conviction and 6-year imprisonment.
Emphasized that tampering with signaling systems is as dangerous as track sabotage.
Legal Principle:
Interference with railway safety systems (signals, points, switches) is treated as serious criminal offense.
Potential danger to life elevates penalty.
6. Union of India v. Raghav Sharma (Supreme Court, 2020)
Facts:
Accused placed nails and spikes on railway tracks in Rajasthan.
Train derailed; three fatalities occurred, many injured.
Charges:
Sections 302 IPC (murder) and 436 IPC (mischief).
Railways Act Sections 145, 146.
Court Decision:
Supreme Court upheld death penalty of the accused in rare cases involving intentional sabotage causing mass fatalities.
Court emphasized deterrence due to the high risk of rail accidents.
Legal Principle:
If sabotage causes death, courts may treat it as culpable homicide/murder.
Sabotage is not merely property damage; loss of human life attracts the highest criminal liability.
Key Legal Principles from Railway Sabotage Cases
Tampering with railway tracks or infrastructure is criminal per se:
Punishable under IPC and Railways Act, even if no derailment occurs.
Attempt is sufficient for conviction:
Courts punish preparatory acts if there is clear intent to endanger life.
Public safety is paramount:
Sabotage of railways is treated as grave public safety threat, even if no casualties occur.
Use of anti-terror laws in certain cases:
Terror-motivated sabotage attracts UAPA charges and stricter sentencing.
Intent determines severity of punishment:
Accidental or reckless acts → Sections 336/337 IPC, Railways Act.
Intentional acts causing death → Sections 302/436 IPC, possibly capital punishment in extreme cases.
Signal and operational interference = sabotage:
Not just track tampering; tampering with signaling or safety systems is equally serious.
RELATED Blog
comments