Case at a Glance
A Chennai resident whose unwell wife was not allowed to keep using her sleeping berth beyond the prescribed hours challenged Para 652(a) of the Indian Railway Commercial Manual, Vol. I, which provides sleeping accommodation between 2200 hours and 0600 hours and sitting accommodation at other times. A Division Bench of the Madras High Court held that the restriction has a reasonable nexus to passenger convenience, because middle and upper berth passengers need seating during the day. One instance of co-passengers refusing to cooperate did not justify striking down the rule, particularly when Para 652(d) already asks passengers to cooperate with sick persons, persons with disability and pregnant women. The writ appeal was disposed of, with the Court saying passengers in difficulty can approach railway staff, the RPF or station officials.
The appellant, a frequent traveller from Chennai, said that his wife was unwell during a journey and was not allowed to use her sleeping berth beyond the prescribed hours. He challenged Para 652(a) of the Indian Railway Commercial Manual, Vol. I, introduced through Circular No. 60/2017, which provides sleeping accommodation between 2200 hours and 0600 hours and sitting accommodation for the rest of the day. The respondents were the Union of India (Ministry of Railways) and the General Manager, Southern Railway.
A learned Single Judge dismissed his writ petition, W.P. No. 3837 of 2026, by order dated 11.02.2026. In the writ appeal, he argued that the safeguard in Para 652(d), under which passengers are “requested to co-operate with sick, persons with disability and pregnant ladies”, was ineffective because co-passengers did not heed his request, and that the time restriction should be declared unconstitutional.
The Key Question Before the Court
Is the Railways’ rule restricting the use of sleeping berths to 10 PM–6 AM arbitrary and liable to be struck down because co-passengers sometimes refuse to accommodate a sick traveller?
A Rule for Shared Coaches, With a Safety Valve
The Bench explained that the Railways introduced the time restriction to balance the convenience of all ticket holders in three-tier coaches. Passengers allotted middle and upper berths need a place to sit during the day, and the restriction lets everyone travel comfortably. The Court held that the restriction has a reasonable nexus with passenger convenience and that a single incident in which co-passengers declined to extend sleeping hours for a sick person could not be a ground to invalidate the provision.
The Court pointed to Para 652(d), which allows sick persons, persons with disability and pregnant women to sleep beyond the prescribed hours with the cooperation of co-passengers. If co-passengers refuse, the passenger should raise the matter with on-board railway staff, the Railway Protection Force or officials at the next station. Calling the challenge “entirely baseless and misplaced”, the Bench upheld the Single Judge’s order, while adding that railway officials must ensure that the Para 652(d) safeguards are enforced when complaints are made. The appellant’s counsel stated that a complaint about the non-provision of facilities had already been filed; the Court left it to the appellant to pursue it.
What the Court Actually Held
- Para 652(a) of the Indian Railway Commercial Manual, Vol. I, restricting sleeping accommodation to 2200–0600 hours, has a reasonable nexus to passenger convenience and is not liable to be struck down.
- A single instance of co-passengers refusing to accommodate a sick person does not make the rule unconstitutional.
- Para 652(d) already provides for sick passengers, persons with disability and pregnant women to sleep beyond the prescribed hours; passengers facing difficulty may approach railway staff, the RPF or station officials, who must ensure the safeguards are enforced.
- The Single Judge’s dismissal was upheld and the writ appeal was disposed of without costs.
Why This Judgment Matters
- Berth-time disputes are among the most common quarrels on Indian trains; the judgment confirms the rule that governs them.
- It reminds passengers that the manual itself carries a specific exception for sick, disabled and pregnant travellers.
- It places a duty on railway officials to act when passengers complain that the exception is not being honoured.
What Should Advocates Take Away From the Judgment?
For Passengers
- Sleeping berths are meant for sleeping between 10 PM and 6 AM; during the day, lower-berth passengers must share seating with those on middle and upper berths.
- If you or a family member is unwell, disabled or pregnant, you can ask co-passengers to cooperate under Para 652(d).
- If they refuse, approach the TTE or on-board staff, the RPF or officials at the next station rather than arguing.
For Counsel
- A challenge to an administrative rule needs more than a single grievance; show systemic arbitrariness.
- Where the rule contains its own exception and complaint route, courts will expect that route to be used first.
- A complaint about failure to enforce the safeguard remains open and can be pursued separately.
Key Takeaways
- The 10 PM–6 AM berth rule in Para 652(a) has been upheld by the Madras High Court.
- The rule exists so that middle and upper berth passengers have seats during the day.
- Para 652(d) asks passengers to cooperate with sick persons, persons with disability and pregnant women.
- Railway staff, the RPF and station officials are the first port of call when that cooperation is refused.
Frequently Asked Questions
Can I sleep on my berth during the day on a train?
Under Para 652(a) of the Indian Railway Commercial Manual, sleeping accommodation is provided between 10 PM and 6 AM, and berths are used for sitting at other times. The Madras High Court has upheld this rule.
What if a sick family member needs to lie down during the day?
Para 652(d) requests passengers to cooperate with sick persons, persons with disability and pregnant women who need to sleep beyond those hours. If co-passengers refuse, the Court said the matter can be raised with on-board staff, the RPF or officials at the next station.
Did the Court strike down the berth timing rule?
No. It held the rule has a reasonable nexus with passenger convenience and dismissed the challenge, while noting that officials must enforce the Para 652(d) safeguards.
Conclusion
The Madras High Court has refused to strike down the Railways’ berth-timing rule, finding it a reasonable way of sharing limited space in crowded coaches. At the same time, the judgment underlines that the rule carries a built-in exception for those who need to lie down, and that railway officials are expected to step in when that exception is ignored.
Practical takeaway: Travelling with someone unwell, disabled or pregnant? Invoke Para 652(d) politely, and if co-passengers refuse, call the TTE, on-board staff or the RPF instead of escalating the dispute.
For more judgments, legal opinions and case analysis, visit courtkutchehry.com