The Supreme Court dismissed concurrent findings of district, state, and national consumer fora asking the Railways to pay Rs 1 lakh with interest as compensation to a cloth merchant who suffered theft of the same amount during his journey in April 2005 by ruling on Thursday that money stolen from a passenger during a train journey cannot be characterised as a deficiency of service on the part of the Railways.
When the Railways appealed against the unanimous decisions of the consumer fora, a vacation bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Ahsanuddin Amanullah agreed with central government attorney Rajan K Chourasia and stated, “We fail to understand as to how the theft could be said to be a deficiency of service by the Railways when the passenger was not able to safekeep his belongings.”
On April 27, 2005, cloth merchant Surender Bhola boarded the Kashi Vishwanath Express on a reserved seat to Delhi in order to buy stock in clothing. He had Rs 1 lakh stored in the cloth belt around his waist. On April 28, at 3.30 am, he discovered that Rs 1 lakh had been taken in addition to the cutting of his fabric belt and a portion of the right side of his trousers. On April 28, he filed a FIR with the Government Railway Police (GRP) after departing from Delhi station.
Railways stated that it was solely accountable for the luggage that had been reserved through them, not for the personal effects of passengers. The district forum was informed that posters had been posted at each station cautioning visitors to be cautious and responsible with regard to the safekeeping of their items. It had stated that the GRP acting under state governments is responsible for the security of the passengers and their belongings.
In 2006, the district forum partially upheld the complaint and ordered the Railways to provide Bhola Rs. 1 lakh while rejecting demands for interest and compensation for the damaged trousers. The Uttar Pradesh state consumer dispute resolution commission rejected the Railways’ appeal on December 31, 2014. On June 12, 2015, the National Consumer Disputes Redress Commission similarly rejected the Railways petition.
Written By- Aditya Singh, College Name- Army Law College, Pune, Semester- 2nd Semester Student an intern under Legal Vidhya
0 Comments