Law & Justice

Madras High Court Affirms 10 PM–6 AM Sleeping Berth Window in Reserved Coaches

By Livemint

The Madras High Court has upheld Indian Railways’ rule that sleeping berths in reserved coaches may be used only between 10 PM and 6 AM, according to Hindustan Times. A division bench of Chief Justice S A Dharmadhikari and Justice G Arul Murugan dismissed an appeal that challenged Para 652(a) of the Indian Railway Commercial Manual, Volume I, which sets the hours for sleeping accommodation.

The bench noted that the restriction is intended to balance the convenience of all passengers in a coach. It said that a single incident in which fellow passengers refused to allow an unwell passenger to use a berth beyond the prescribed hours was insufficient to invalidate a rule that serves the broader public interest. The court quoted: “The restrictions under Para 652 bear a reasonable nexus for ensuring convenience for all travelling passengers. A solitary instance, where co‑passengers declined to extend sleeping hours for the appellant’s unwell wife, does not justify invalidating a rule designed to serve the broader public interest.”

The appeal was filed by S Balasubramanian of Chennai after a dispute with co‑passengers during a train journey with his wife, who was reportedly unwell and needed to use a berth outside the 10 PM–6 AM window. Balasubramanian argued that the manual already provides for pregnant women, persons with disabilities and sick passengers to seek accommodation from co‑passengers, and that these safeguards were ineffective if passengers could refuse such requests.

Under Para 652, sleeping accommodation is available from 10 PM to 6 AM; from 6 AM to 10 PM the berths are intended for seating to allow passengers with middle and upper berths adequate space during the day. The court emphasized that the restriction is meant to ensure that all ticket holders can travel comfortably without one passenger’s use of a berth inconveniencing others.

The High Court also clarified that passengers facing difficulties can approach railway officials to enforce the safeguards under Para 652(d). It noted that Balasubramanian could have approached the Railway Protection Force or other railway officials when his co‑passenger allegedly refused to cooperate.

The decision reaffirms the railway manual’s provisions while reminding passengers that special accommodations are still available for those who qualify under the manual’s safeguards.