India's train travel experience is unique, with vendors selling their wares, lively interactions with other travellers, and interesting sights and sounds as we chug along the countryside. The Indian Railways has the distinction of being the largest network in the world, moving thousands to their destinations each day. Over the decades, passengers have seen several improvements to the networks that have improved the overall experience of their journey. They have also faced challenges, some of which remain unresolved, thorny issues. Concerns about safeguarding personal belongings is one of them, with the incident described in this article drawing attention to the rights of passengers, as seen under the Consumer Protection Act.
Background :
In January 2016, a passenger on a New Delhi to Indore train found her bag missing between Jhansi and Gwalior. She reported it to the Train Ticket Examiner (TTE), who gave her a form to fill in, and verbally assured her of an investigation. However, no written acknowledgement was given to the complainant. Additionally, other passengers had also had belongings missing, and had reported to the TTE about a suspicious, unauthorised individual roaming the compartments. Upon reaching Indore, the Government Railway Police (GRP) refused to take her complaint on grounds of jurisdiction, redirecting her to GRP Gwalior, which also declined on the grounds that the TTE had already registered it. The complainant was then forced to approach various officials and agencies, in a bid to take up her cause. It was after intervention from the State Bank Foundation Institute, (where the complainant was travelling to attend a mandatory training), in February 2016, that an FIR was filed by GRP Indore. However, no action followed the FIR. This forced the passenger to send a legal notice but even this received no reply. The complainant finally approached the Consumer Commission in Delhi on 20/02/2018.
The Commission considered the case under various Regulations, including the Indian Railways Act 1989, the Consumer Protection Act 2019, the Indian Railway Conference Association (IRCA), and the Railway Tribunal Act. Additionally, data disclosed by the Railways was also considered, with the data indicating an upward trend in luggage theft, rising from 2,831 incidents in 2022 to 3,909 by November 30, 2023.
The judgement was based on the following conditions:
- In the judgement, the Commission clarified that the complainant is firstly a consumer, as defined under the Consumer Protection Act 2016 which includes ‘transport services’.
- At the hearing, the Indian Railways argued that the security of passengers and their luggage was the responsibility of the Government Railway Police (GRP), not the railway authorities. They also stated that according to Rule 506.2 of Indian Railway Conference Association (IRCA) No. 24, No. 216, the passenger remains responsible for their own language. They also claimed that as per regulation, the passenger is supposed to declare any valuables at the start of the journey, and have them insured by paying the necessary charges, and that this will ensure that the railway administration can take the necessary precautions. In this case, the articles were not entrusted to the Railways by payment of necessary charges. Any luggage therefore remained the sole responsibility of the complainant. However, the Commission clarified that Section 100 of the Railway Act, 1989, is about the responsibilities of the Railways as a carrier of luggage, and as defined u/s 2(23) of the the Act, ‘luggage’ is ‘goods of a passenger either carried by him in his charge, or entrusted to railway administration for carriage’. The Commission therefore asserted that personal luggage is equally covered under the responsibilities of the Railways.
- The Indian Railways also argued that the Delhi Commission did not have territorial jurisdiction in this case. The Commission stated that in the case of a journey, the cause of action is considered as continuous between the two points, and was not limited to just the point where the claim arose. The Commission also stated that the location of the Indian Railways office fell within the jurisdiction of the Delhi Commission.
- The complainant also produced documentary records in the form of an invoice for the laptop, and her internet dongle, with the remaining being personal valuables, including cash. She also produced a picture of the filled form initially provided by the TTE, which remained unchallenged in the absence of contrary evidence. The Commission also observed that the nature of articles stolen reflected that she was travelling for training, and that this supported her case.
- The manner in which the episode happened, and the stress on the complainant to ensure her complaint was registered meant that she suffered all kinds of inconvenience and harassment to pursue her legal rights. This further established her case of negligence and deficiency of services against the railways.
The message for passengers
The key takeaway from this landmark case is that passengers understand their rights and responsibilities to help them confidently navigate unfortunate situations such as in this case.
As a matter of course, if a passenger is the victim of theft, the first point of contact should be the conductor, or GRP or RPF guard who will provide an FIR form for the passenger to fill in. This will be passed on to the police station for necessary action. The passenger is not required to break their journey to file the FIR.
The Indian Railway Conference Association (IRCA) also has rules in place for passengers, requiring them to declare and insure valuable items before boarding the train. These provide an additional layer of security for valuables.
Lastly, the Railway Tribunal Act clarifies that consumer forums have jurisdiction over complaints of deficient services or negligence. It provides additional remedies to customers and reinforces the power of consumer forums to address consumer disputes regarding services or negligence.
By understanding the provisions of these laws and regulations and by being informed about their rights and responsibilities, passengers can better protect themselves and their belongings.
Conclusion:
This case serves as a reminder of the responsibilities of railway authorities in ensuring the safety and security of passengers and their belongings. The ruling underscores the importance of vigilance by railway staff and the potential consequences of negligence. The Commission has ordered that the complainant be compensated with a sum of Rs. 80,000 for the loss by theft along with an additional sum of Rs. 20,000 towards compensation and damages and Rs. 8000 towards litigation cost. If the Railways does not pay the amount within 45 days, they will be liable to pay interest at the rate of 6% pa on the amount of Rs.80,000 from the date of filing of the complaint until the realisation of the amount.
Add new comment