  Hashmi et al. [J. Phys. A 49, 345302 (2016)] claimed that the approach to the
past of a quantum particle introduced by Vaidman [Phys. Rev. A 87, 052104
(2013)] has difficulties in certain examples and that it even can be refuted.
Here I reply to their criticism showing that the approach provides a good
explanation of all examples they considered. It is fully consistent with
standard quantum mechanics and provides a useful tool for analyzing
interference experiments.
